linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 7/8] clk: qcom: dispcc-sm8250: stop using mmcx regulator

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]

Date:   Thu, 14 Oct 2021 17:01:55 -0700
From:   Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>
To:     Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
        Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>
Cc:     Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Taniya Das <tdas@...eaurora.org>,
        Jonathan Marek <jonathan@...ek.ca>,
        Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
        Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@...aro.org>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 7/8] clk: qcom: dispcc-sm8250: stop using mmcx regulator

Quoting Dmitry Baryshkov (2021-10-14 02:53:41)
> On 13/10/2021 22:50, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > Quoting Dmitry Baryshkov (2021-10-07 09:16:13)
> >> On 07/10/2021 18:48, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> >>> On Sun 29 Aug 08:47 PDT 2021, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Now as the common qcom clock controller code has been taught about power
> >>>> domains, stop mentioning mmcx supply as a way to power up the clock
> >>>> controller's gdsc.
> >>>>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>
> >>>> Reviewed-by: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>
> >>>
> >>> Once we merge these, I expect that the boards will start crashing if
> >>> the kernel is booted using an existing DTB?
> >>>
> >>> Is it okay to just merge the first 6 patches in the series now and
> >>> postpone these two until we've had the dts change sitting for a while?
> >>
> >> Sure it is.
> >>
> > 
> > What's the merge strategy? It goes through arm-soc?
> 
> I think this should go through the clk tree. There is little chance of 
> conflicts.
> 
> 

Ok. So I take the first 6 through clk tree and then we wait for the last
two?