[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160706052220.GK23212@localhost>
Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2016 22:22:20 -0700
From: Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>
To: John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>
Cc: lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, arm@...nel.org,
Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>, Wei Xu <xuwei5@...ilicon.com>,
Guodong Xu <guodong.xu@...aro.org>,
Zhangfei Gao <zhangfei.gao@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2 v3] Add pl031 RTC support for Hi6220
On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 05:48:43PM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
> This patchset enables the pl031 RTC on the Hi6220 SoC.
>
> I'd like to submit it to be merged.
>
> Wei has acked the second patch (modulo a whitespace fix which
> I've included in this v3), so it seems like both could go
> through the clk tree.
>
> But Wei also seemed open to pulling in a clk tree branch
> as it goes through arm-soc.
>
> Michael/Stephen: If there's no other objections, could you
> queue the first patch and make it avilable via the branch for
> Wei, or just take both patches?
I happen to dread these kind of patchsets these days. There's added
dependencies across trees just because a defined name for the clock
number is added to a header file.
I much prefer to use numerical clocks for one release, and then once
everything is in, switch over to the defines in the DTS.
That way there are no dependencies, no need to setup a shared branch
for a simple 3-line patch, etc.
So, mind respinning the DTS piece?
Thanks!
-Olof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists