linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 10/13] ARM: dts: exynos: replace to "max-frequecy" instead of "clock-freq-min-max"

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:   Fri, 4 Nov 2016 17:04:47 +0200
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To:     Heiko Stuebner <heiko@...ech.de>
Cc:     Jaehoon Chung <jh80.chung@...sung.com>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>,
        linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org, ulf.hansson@...aro.org,
        robh+dt@...nel.org, shawn.lin@...k-chips.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/13] ARM: dts: exynos: replace to "max-frequecy"
 instead of "clock-freq-min-max"

On Fri, Nov 04, 2016 at 12:19:49PM +0100, Heiko Stuebner wrote:
> Hi Jaehoon,
> 
> Am Freitag, 4. November 2016, 19:21:30 CET schrieb Jaehoon Chung:
> > On 11/04/2016 03:41 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > > On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 03:21:32PM +0900, Jaehoon Chung wrote:
> > >> In drivers/mmc/core/host.c, there is "max-frequency" property.
> > >> It should be same behavior. So Use the "max-frequency" instead of
> > >> "clock-freq-min-max".
> > >> 
> > >> Signed-off-by: Jaehoon Chung <jh80.chung@...sung.com>
> > >> ---
> > >> 
> > >>  arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos3250-artik5-eval.dts | 2 +-
> > >>  arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos3250-artik5.dtsi     | 2 +-
> > >>  arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos3250-monk.dts        | 2 +-
> > >>  arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos3250-rinato.dts      | 2 +-
> > >>  4 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > This looks totally independent to rest of patches so it can be applied
> > > separately without any functional impact (except lack of minimum
> > > frequency). Is that correct?
> > 
> > You're right. I will split the patches. And will resend.
> > Thanks!
> 
> I think what Krzysztof was asking was just if he can simply pick up this patch 
> alone, as it does not require any of the previous changes.
> 
> Same is true for the Rockchip patches I guess, so we could just take them 
> individually into samsung/rockchip dts branches.

Yes, I wanted to get exactly this information. I couldn't find it in
cover letter.

Best regards,
Krzysztof