linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] Add CPU clock support for Armada 7K/8K

Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Message-ID: <871s4c5an3.fsf@FE-laptop>
Date:   Wed, 13 Feb 2019 09:57:04 +0100
From:   Gregory CLEMENT <gregory.clement@...tlin.com>
To:     Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>
Cc:     devicetree@...r.kernel.org, Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Antoine Tenart <antoine.tenart@...tlin.com>,
        Mike Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Maxime Chevallier <maxime.chevallier@...tlin.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com>,
        Miquèl Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>,
        linux-clk@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        Sebastian Hesselbarth <sebastian.hesselbarth@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] Add CPU clock support for Armada 7K/8K

Hi Stephen,

 On jeu., janv. 10 2019, Gregory CLEMENT <gregory.clement@...tlin.com> wrote:

> Hi Stephen,
>  
>  On jeu., janv. 10 2019, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org> wrote:
>
>> Quoting Gregory CLEMENT (2019-01-10 08:16:22)
>>> Hi Stephen,
>>>  
>>>  On dim., déc. 16 2018, Gregory CLEMENT <gregory.clement@...tlin.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> > Hello,
>>> >
>>> > This is the third version of a series allowing to manage the cpu
>>> > clock for Armada 7K/8K. For these SoCs, the CPUs share the same clock
>>> > by cluster, so actually the clock management is done at cluster level.
>>> >
>>> > As for the other Armada 7K/8K clocks it is possible to have multiple
>>> > AP so here again we need to have unique name: the purpose of the second
>>> > patch is to share a common code which will be used in 3 drivers.
>>> >
>>> > The last 2 patch enable the driver at dt and platform level and will
>>> > be applied through the mvebu subsystem.
>>> 
>>> What is the status of this series?
>>> 
>>> The only comments I had was from Rob about the binding and I answered
>>> them 3 weeks ago. Do you have any other comments? Do you expect a rebase
>>> of this series on v5.0-rc1?
>>> 
>>
>> I'm waiting for Rob. I think the binding is not proper so presumably you
>> will figure out what Rob wants and then change the code accordingly and
>> resend?
>
> Actually the binding describes properly the hardware we have and that
> what I answered to Rob.

I pinged you about this series more than one month ago, and answered Rob
concerned 2 months ago! He didn't said anything about my comments so I
really think that the binding is OK and described the hardware we have.

So could you consider to apply this series?

Thanks,

Gregory

>
> Gregory
>
> -- 
> Gregory Clement, Bootlin
> Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
> http://bootlin.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
> linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

-- 
Gregory Clement, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
http://bootlin.com

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