linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/4] clk: mvebu: Expand mv98dx3236-core-clock support

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:   Wed, 8 Feb 2017 20:00:15 +0000
From:   Chris Packham <Chris.Packham@...iedtelesis.co.nz>
To:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
CC:     Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>,
        "linux-clk@...r.kernel.org" <linux-clk@...r.kernel.org>,
        Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        "Gregory Clement" <gregory.clement@...e-electrons.com>,
        Sebastian Hesselbarth <sebastian.hesselbarth@...il.com>,
        Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] clk: mvebu: Expand mv98dx3236-core-clock support

On 08/02/17 23:53, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Tuesday, February 7, 2017 3:07:37 AM CET Chris Packham wrote:
>>>
>>> Actually I wonder if I can try a bit harder to keep a system booting.
>>> The following might work
>>> 1) add the compatible strings to the existing armada clock drivers.
>>> 2) update the dts to use the new compatible strings.
>>> 3) add the new driver and remove the compatible strings from the armada
>>> drivers.
>>>
>>> #1 would still upset checkpatch.pl because the documentation would only
>>> arrive in #2.
>>
>> Actually upon testing #1 is unnecessary. I lose some of the gated clocks
>> but nothing that prevents booting.
>
> Just to be sure: this means we can merge 2) and 3) independently and
> having just one of them will not cause regressions over what we have
> today?
>

Correct. And that's what I sent out as v2.

http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2017-February/486467.html
http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2017-February/486471.html