linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] da8xx clocks (was part of "da8xx USB clocks")

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]

Message-ID: <57108BFA.4080509@ti.com>
Date:	Fri, 15 Apr 2016 12:06:42 +0530
From:	Sekhar Nori <nsekhar@...com>
To:	David Lechner <david@...hnology.com>
CC:	Kevin Hilman <khilman@...nel.org>,
	Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] da8xx clocks (was part of "da8xx USB clocks")

On Friday 15 April 2016 12:56 AM, David Lechner wrote:
> On 04/14/2016 02:13 PM, David Lechner wrote:
>> I have separated these patches from the "da8xx USB clocks" series
>> since that
>> series no longer depends on the clock init being moved.
>>
>> Tested working on the linux-davinci/master branch with LEGO MINDSTORMS
>> EV3.
>>
>> David Lechner (2):
>>    ARM: davinci: Move clock init after ioremap.
>>    ARM: davinci: da850: use clk->set_parent for async3
>>
>>   arch/arm/mach-davinci/clock.c  |  2 +-
>>   arch/arm/mach-davinci/common.c |  6 ---
>>   arch/arm/mach-davinci/da830.c  |  2 +
>>   arch/arm/mach-davinci/da850.c  | 90
>> ++++++++++++++++++++----------------------
>>   arch/arm/mach-davinci/dm355.c  |  1 +
>>   arch/arm/mach-davinci/dm365.c  |  1 +
>>   arch/arm/mach-davinci/dm644x.c |  1 +
>>   arch/arm/mach-davinci/dm646x.c |  1 +
>>   8 files changed, 49 insertions(+), 55 deletions(-)
>>
> 
> Hmm... I was just reviewing my previous emails and you said that you
> have already applied these two patches, but they don't seem to have made
> it into the linux-davinci/master branch with the others.

No, I had commented about removing the new clk init function you had
introduced so I was waiting for that to be addressed. I was okay with
the second patch in this series, but did not push it to master branch as
it depends on clk init movement and breaks boot if applied independently.

I will review these two patches.

Regards,
Sekhar