linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 04/15] clk: Add Ingenic jz4770 CGU driver

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]

Message-ID: <20170626224946.GR4493@codeaurora.org>
Date:   Mon, 26 Jun 2017 15:49:46 -0700
From:   Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>
To:     Paul Cercueil <paul@...pouillou.net>
Cc:     Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>,
        Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Paul Burton <paul.burton@...tec.com>,
        Maarten ter Huurne <maarten@...ewalker.org>,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mips@...ux-mips.org, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/15] clk: Add Ingenic jz4770 CGU driver

On 06/26, Paul Cercueil wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Le 2017-06-07 22:59, Stephen Boyd a écrit :
> >On 06/07, Paul Cercueil wrote:
> >>Add support for the clocks provided by the CGU in the Ingenic JZ4770
> >>SoC.
> >>
> >>Signed-off-by: Paul Cercueil <paul@...pouillou.net>
> >>Signed-off-by: Maarten ter Huurne <maarten@...ewalker.org>
> 
> [...]
> 
> >>diff --git a/include/dt-bindings/clock/jz4770-cgu.h
> >>b/include/dt-bindings/clock/jz4770-cgu.h
> >>new file mode 100644
> >>index 000000000000..54b8b2ae4a73
> >>--- /dev/null
> >>+++ b/include/dt-bindings/clock/jz4770-cgu.h
> >
> >Can you split this file off into a different patch? That way clk
> >tree can apply clk patches on top of a stable branch where this
> >file lives by itself.
> 
> Oops, I forgot that in the v2.
> 
> The jz4770-cgu.c file includes and uses
> <dt-bindings/clock/jz4770-cgu.h>, so I don't think
> it would make sense to split it, since it wouldn't compile without it.

I was suggesting this header file be a patch before the driver C
file patch, so that it would still compile. Does that change
anything?

-- 
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project