linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 04/13] clk: davinci: psc-dm646x: use two lookup entries for the aemif clock

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: <28c47ca0-60ca-beb2-cd78-63ef6595fcd5@ti.com>
Date:   Wed, 27 Jun 2018 15:56:11 +0530
From:   Sekhar Nori <nsekhar@...com>
To:     Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>
CC:     Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>,
        Kevin Hilman <khilman@...nel.org>,
        Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        David Lechner <david@...hnology.com>,
        Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>,
        arm-soc <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-clk <linux-clk@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 04/13] clk: davinci: psc-dm646x: use two lookup entries
 for the aemif clock

On Wednesday 27 June 2018 03:33 PM, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> 2018-06-27 12:01 GMT+02:00 Sekhar Nori <nsekhar@...com>:
>> On Tuesday 26 June 2018 02:55 PM, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
>>> From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>
>>>
>>> We want to be able to get the clock both from the board file by its
>>> con_id and from the aemif driver by dev_id.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>
>>
>> I see the DM365 and DM644x EVM board files getting reference to aemif
>> clock using just the con_id, but don't see that for DM646x. Am I
>> overlooking something?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Sekhar
> 
> It's being done indirectly from mach-davinci/aemif.c. I guess we can
> remove it again after last patch.

I see. One way to avoid that would be to merge this into 11/13. I prefer
that, but it prevents clean separation of clock and machine patches. So
okay with current way too.

Thanks,
Sekhar