linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 4/9] dt-bindings: clock: brcm,kona-ccu: Add BCM281xx bus clocks

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: <2b120341-0026-4a9c-9ad1-b14adfac50c8@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2025 21:20:09 +0100
From: Artur Weber <aweber.kernel@...il.com>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
Cc: Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
 Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>,
 Florian Fainelli <florian.fainelli@...adcom.com>, Ray Jui
 <rjui@...adcom.com>, Scott Branden <sbranden@...adcom.com>,
 Broadcom internal kernel review list
 <bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley
 <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Alex Elder <elder@...nel.org>,
 Stanislav Jakubek <stano.jakubek@...il.com>, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
 ~postmarketos/upstreaming@...ts.sr.ht
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/9] dt-bindings: clock: brcm,kona-ccu: Add BCM281xx
 bus clocks

On 10.03.2025 10:43, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 08, 2025 at 08:50:42AM +0100, Artur Weber wrote:
>> Add bus clocks corresponding to peripheral clocks currently supported
>> by the BCM281xx clock driver and add the relevant clock IDs to the
>> clock/bcm281xx.h dt-bindings header.
> 
> Please squash the patch so we see complete change.

Squash which patch(-es)? Both CCU bindings and the dt-bindings header
are modified in this patch, as outlined in the commit message (though
now that I look at it, I could reword the first sentence to specifically
imply "add bus clocks *to the binding*"...). What is missing?

(Sorry for the separate reply, I meant to reply to this in the previous
message but accidentally removed my reply.)

Best regards
Artur