[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7c87aee4-dde4-ab3d-06b0-75f3686ab5dd@suse.de>
Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2017 16:36:30 +0800
From: Andreas Färber <afaerber@...e.de>
To: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org>
Cc: mturquette@...libre.com, sboyd@...eaurora.org, robh+dt@...nel.org,
mark.rutland@....com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-clk@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net,
mchehab@...nel.org, rdunlap@...radead.org,
daniel.thompson@...aro.org, amit.kucheria@...aro.org,
liuwei@...ions-semi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] clk: owl: add clock driver for Actions S900 SoC
Hi Mani,
Still on travels, but some quick comments:
Please compare the CC list from my patch series - you seem to be missing
some Actions Semi people.
Am 01.11.2017 um 03:54 schrieb Manivannan Sadhasivam:
> This patch adds clock driver for Actions Semi OWL
> series S900 SoC.
>
> Signed-off-by: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org>
> ---
> MAINTAINERS | 5 +
> drivers/clk/Makefile | 1 +
> drivers/clk/owl/Makefile | 2 +
> drivers/clk/owl/clk-factor.c | 270 ++++++++++++
> drivers/clk/owl/clk-pll.c | 346 +++++++++++++++
> drivers/clk/owl/clk-s900.c | 587 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
> drivers/clk/owl/clk.c | 318 ++++++++++++++
> drivers/clk/owl/clk.h | 301 +++++++++++++
Taking into account previous arm/DT side comments I received, we should
use clk/actions/ rather than clk/owl/. We can still use owl- or -owl
inside actions/ if necessary.
> include/dt-bindings/clock/actions,s900-clock.h | 141 ++++++
> 9 files changed, 1971 insertions(+)
> create mode 100644 drivers/clk/owl/Makefile
> create mode 100644 drivers/clk/owl/clk-factor.c
> create mode 100644 drivers/clk/owl/clk-pll.c
> create mode 100644 drivers/clk/owl/clk-s900.c
> create mode 100644 drivers/clk/owl/clk.c
> create mode 100644 drivers/clk/owl/clk.h
> create mode 100644 include/dt-bindings/clock/actions,s900-clock.h
>
> diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
> index 2d3d750..beae8aa 100644
> --- a/MAINTAINERS
> +++ b/MAINTAINERS
> @@ -1098,6 +1098,11 @@ F: arch/arm/mach-*/
> F: arch/arm/plat-*/
> T: git git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/arm/arm-soc.git
>
> +ARM/ACTIONS SEMI SoC CLOCK SUPPORT
> +L: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org>
You're not a mailing list. If you want to be the maintainer (M:), fine
with me, but I'd like to be CC'ed please - either via R: here or by
extending the section below.
> +S: Maintained
> +F: drivers/clk/owl/
This is lacking the binding.
> +
> ARM/ACTIONS SEMI ARCHITECTURE
> M: Andreas Färber <afaerber@...e.de>
> L: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org (moderated for non-subscribers)
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/Makefile b/drivers/clk/Makefile
> index c99f363..821c1e1 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/Makefile
> +++ b/drivers/clk/Makefile
> @@ -75,6 +75,7 @@ endif
> obj-y += mvebu/
> obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_MXS) += mxs/
> obj-$(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK_NXP) += nxp/
> +obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_ACTIONS) += owl/
> obj-$(CONFIG_MACH_PISTACHIO) += pistachio/
> obj-$(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK_PXA) += pxa/
> obj-$(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK_QCOM) += qcom/
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/owl/Makefile b/drivers/clk/owl/Makefile
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..dbba0af
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/clk/owl/Makefile
> @@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
> +obj-y += clk.o clk-pll.o clk-factor.o
> +obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_ACTIONS) += clk-s900.o
$(CONFIG_ARCH_ACTIONS) is superfluous here.
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/owl/clk-factor.c b/drivers/clk/owl/clk-factor.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..6429acd
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/clk/owl/clk-factor.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,270 @@
> +/*
> + * Copyright (c) 2014 Actions Semi Inc.
> + * David Liu <liuwei@...ions-semi.com>
> + *
> + * Copyright (c) 2017 Linaro Ltd.
> + * Author: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org>
> + *
> + * This program is free software: you can redistribute it and/or modify
> + * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License v2 as published by
> + * the Free Software Foundation.
I had found that S500 code was licensed under GPLv2+ but some S900 parts
were GPLv2 only. I personally have a bias towards GPLv2+ - any chance we
can use that here?
Implementation not yet reviewed.
Regards,
Andreas
--
SUSE Linux GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton
HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists