[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <531c2dfa-b96b-4fa2-ac45-4a5be14fafca@baylibre.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2025 11:38:17 -0600
From: David Lechner <dlechner@...libre.com>
To: "Miclaus, Antoniu" <Antoniu.Miclaus@...log.com>,
"jic23@...nel.org" <jic23@...nel.org>, "robh@...nel.org" <robh@...nel.org>,
"conor+dt@...nel.org" <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
"linux-iio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-iio@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH v2 0/2] iio: frequency: adf4377: add clock provider
support
On 11/24/25 6:09 AM, Miclaus, Antoniu wrote:
>> On 11/21/25 3:59 AM, Antoniu Miclaus wrote:
>>> This series adds clock provider functionality to the ADF4377 frequency
>>> synthesizer driver to address user requests for controlling output
>>> frequencies from userspace.
>>>
>>> While implemented as an IIO driver, the ADF4377 is commonly used as a
>>> clock source. This patch series enables it to function as either:
>>> - A traditional IIO device (when #clock-cells is not specified)
>>> - A clock provider (when #clock-cells is present in device tree)
>>>
>>> The implementation provides standard clock framework integration with
>>> rate control, enable/disable support, and maintains backward
>>> compatibility with existing IIO configurations.
>>>
>>> Antoniu Miclaus (2):
>>> dt-bindings: iio: frequency: adf4377: add clk provider
>>> iio: frequency: adf4377: add clk provider support
>>>
>>> .../bindings/iio/frequency/adi,adf4377.yaml | 8 ++
>>> drivers/iio/frequency/adf4377.c | 119 +++++++++++++++++-
>>> 2 files changed, 125 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>
>> When doing a RESEND, please add a note that says why.
>>
>> Also, you still didn't include the clock mailing list or maintainers,
>> so I don't expect this to progress since the last time.
>
> I forgot to mention in the resend patch, but i missed some of the changes
> when i sent the first v2 series.
> Should i send a v3 with the mentions + clock mailing list?
Doing a v3 with a proper changelog compared to the original v2
+ cc the clock list/maintainers seems like the best way to me.
> Or do another RESEND PATCH for v2?
>
No, I think that would confuse things even more.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists