[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d234060148ab6027bd84c5475851a30329e877a2.camel@linaro.org>
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2024 10:45:10 +0000
From: André Draszik <andre.draszik@...aro.org>
To: Sam Protsenko <semen.protsenko@...aro.org>
Cc: peter.griffin@...aro.org, mturquette@...libre.com, sboyd@...nel.org,
robh+dt@...nel.org, krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, conor+dt@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@...roid.com,
tudor.ambarus@...aro.org, willmcvicker@...gle.com,
alim.akhtar@...sung.com, s.nawrocki@...sung.com, tomasz.figa@...il.com,
cw00.choi@...sung.com, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/9] arm64: dts: exynos: gs101: sysreg_peric1 needs a
clock
Hi Sam,
On Fri, 2024-01-26 at 21:00 -0600, Sam Protsenko wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 26, 2024 at 6:19 PM André Draszik <andre.draszik@...aro.org> wrote:
> >
> > Without the clock running, we can not access its registers, and now
> > that we have it, we should add it here so that it gets enabled as
> > and when needed.
> >
>
> That sounds like this patch deserves "Fixes:" tag :) Other than that:
I didn't add it, because at the time &sysreg_peric1 was added, the clock
macro CLK_GOUT_PERIC1_SYSREG_PERIC1_PCLK didn't exist and &sysreg_peric1
wasn't in use until this series here anyway.
If this patch here gets backported to some older kernel due to the Fixes: tag,
without the whole peric1 series, it wouldn't build. Therefore I left it out.
Should it still be added?
Cheers,
Andre'
Powered by blists - more mailing lists