[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <DB5PR0401MB1928F7FFBDB7D6E4C4B45D9491B70@DB5PR0401MB1928.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2016 07:21:18 +0000
From: Scott Wood <scott.wood@....com>
To: "Y.T. Tang" <yuantian.tang@....com>, Scott Wood <oss@...error.net>,
"mturquette@...libre.com" <mturquette@...libre.com>
CC: "sboyd@...eaurora.org" <sboyd@...eaurora.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...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>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] clk: qoriq: added ls1012a clock configuration
On 11/22/2016 02:20 AM, Y.T. Tang wrote:
> Hi Scott,
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Scott Wood [mailto:oss@...error.net]
>> Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2016 2:54 PM
>> To: Y.T. Tang <yuantian.tang@....com>; mturquette@...libre.com
>> Cc: sboyd@...eaurora.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; Scott Wood
>> <scott.wood@....com>; linux-clk@...r.kernel.org; linux-arm-
>> kernel@...ts.infradead.org
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH] clk: qoriq: added ls1012a clock configuration
>>
>> On Wed, 2016-11-16 at 13:58 +0800, yuantian.tang@....com wrote:
>>> From: Tang Yuantian <Yuantian.Tang@....com>
>>>
>>> Added ls1012a clock configuation information.
>>
>> Do we really need the same line in the changelog twice?
>>
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Tang Yuantian <yuantian.tang@....com>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/clk/clk-qoriq.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++++
>>> 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/clk/clk-qoriq.c b/drivers/clk/clk-qoriq.c index
>>> 1bece0f..563d874 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/clk/clk-qoriq.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/clk/clk-qoriq.c
>>> @@ -202,6 +202,14 @@ static const struct clockgen_muxinfo ls1021a_cmux
>> = {
>>> }
>>> };
>>>
>>> +static const struct clockgen_muxinfo ls1012a_cmux = {
>>> + {
>>> + [0] = { CLKSEL_VALID, CGA_PLL1, PLL_DIV1 },
>>> + {},
>>> + [2] = { CLKSEL_VALID, CGA_PLL1, PLL_DIV2 },
>>> + }
>>> +};
>>> +
>>
>> Based on the "ls1021a_cmux" in the context it looks like this patch is
>> intended to apply on top
>> of https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/8923541/ but I don't see any mention
>> of that.
>>
> I saw this patch had been merged already.
>
> Regards,
> Yuantian
I don't see it in linux-next.
-Scott
Powered by blists - more mailing lists