[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <152150722338.254778.4743967512266809482@swboyd.mtv.corp.google.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2018 17:53:43 -0700
From: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>
To: David Lechner <david@...hnology.com>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Sekhar Nori <nsekhar@...com>,
Kevin Hilman <khilman@...nel.org>,
Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>,
Adam Ford <aford173@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
David Lechner <david@...hnology.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 00/42] ARM: davinci: convert to common clock framework
Quoting David Lechner (2018-03-15 19:52:16)
> This series converts mach-davinci to use the common clock framework.
>
> The series works like this, the first 19 patches create new clock drivers
> using the common clock framework. There are basically 3 groups of clocks -
> PLL, PSC and CFGCHIP (syscon). There are six different SoCs that each have
> unique init data, which is the reason for so many patches.
Should I apply the first 19 patches to clk tree? Looking over them
nothing stands out except for your self comment about the bad
reviewed-by tag which I can remove.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists