[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160509221339.GU3492@codeaurora.org>
Date: Mon, 9 May 2016 15:13:39 -0700
From: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>
To: James Liao <jamesjj.liao@...iatek.com>
Cc: Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
Mike Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
John Crispin <blogic@...nwrt.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Sascha Hauer <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
Daniel Kurtz <djkurtz@...omium.org>,
Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-clk@...r.kernel.org, srv_heupstream@...iatek.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 8/9] clk: mediatek: Add config options for MT2701
subsystem clocks
On 05/09, James Liao wrote:
> HI Stephen,
>
> On Fri, 2016-05-06 at 16:02 -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > On 04/14, James Liao wrote:
> > > MT2701 subsystem clocks are optional and should be enabled only if
> > > their subsystem drivers are ready to control these clocks.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: James Liao <jamesjj.liao@...iatek.com>
> > > ---
> >
> > Why is this patch split off from the patch that introduces the
> > file?
>
> I was looking for comments about how to make subsystem clocks optional.
> So I used a separated patch to do it. Is it an acceptable way to use
> config options to enable subsystem clock support?
>
Yes config options are fine.
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
Powered by blists - more mailing lists