linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RESEND v6 0/9] clk: bcm: kona: Add bus clock support, bus clocks for BCM21664/BCM281xx

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <175834646902.4354.13114906749225372224@lazor>
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2025 22:34:29 -0700
From: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>
To: Artur Weber <aweber.kernel@...il.com>, Broadcom internal kernel review list <bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com>, Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Florian Fainelli <florian.fainelli@...adcom.com>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>, Ray Jui <rjui@...adcom.com>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Scott Branden <sbranden@...adcom.com>
Cc: 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, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>, Alex Elder <elder@...cstar.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND v6 0/9] clk: bcm: kona: Add bus clock support, bus clocks for BCM21664/BCM281xx

Quoting Florian Fainelli (2025-09-04 11:28:34)
> On 9/1/25 10:07, Artur Weber wrote:
> > This patchset does the following:
> > 
> > - Introduce support for bus clocks. These are fairly similar to
> >    peripheral clocks, but only implement policy, gate and hyst.
> > 
> > - Add matching bus clocks for BCM21664 and BCM281xx peripheral clocks
> >    and update device tree bindings to match.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Artur Weber <aweber.kernel@...il.com>
> 
> Stephen, are you OK with taking all of those patches through the clock 
> tree? Patches #8 and #9 have a dependency on patches #2 and #3.
> 

I don't normally do that but sure. Is that a Reviewed-by?