linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 3/8] clk: add support for clocks provided by SCP(System Control Processor)

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 21 Jul 2015 11:05:54 -0700
From:	Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>
To:	Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
CC:	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-clk@...r.kernel.org" <linux-clk@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	Liviu Dudau <Liviu.Dudau@....com>,
	Lorenzo Pieralisi <Lorenzo.Pieralisi@....com>,
	"Jon Medhurst (Tixy)" <tixy@...aro.org>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	Kevin Hilman <khilman@...nel.org>,
	Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
	Mike Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/8] clk: add support for clocks provided by SCP(System
 Control Processor)

On 07/20/2015 01:54 AM, Sudeep Holla wrote:
>
>
> On 17/07/15 19:13, Stephen Boyd wrote:
>> On 07/17/2015 04:17 AM, Sudeep Holla wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>>>
>>> determine_rate change shouldn't affect SCPI clock driver but I remember
>>> seeing round_rate change too on the list which returns value using the
>>> argument from Boris. Is that planned for v4.3 ? I would need the stable
>>> branch from this clk_hw_set_rate_range if you decide to push. Let me
>>> know your preferences. I will post the updated version of the patch
>>> accordingly.
>>>
>>
>> We're not going to change round_rate() so it sounds like you don't need
>> a stable branch. But you would need this new consumer API. So you still
>> need a branch right?
>>
>
> I am fine either way. If no one else need the stable branch to be shared
> with arm-soc, I prefer to use clock consumer API for now to avoid all
> the troubles to you guys and switch to provider API later. I will post
> it once the both this driver and that provider API is merged, if that's
> fine with you ?

Ok. Sounds fine as long as we don't forget.

-- 
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/