netdev - Re: [PATCH 0/2] clk: qcom: Add support for GCC on QCS8300

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: <7ca8aec5-b330-4ece-a0b3-895f3a1f6ba2@quicinc.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2024 10:09:30 +0530
From: Imran Shaik <quic_imrashai@...cinc.com>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
CC: Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
        Michael Turquette
	<mturquette@...libre.com>,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>, Rob Herring
	<robh@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
        Conor Dooley
	<conor+dt@...nel.org>,
        Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>,
        "Ajit
 Pandey" <quic_ajipan@...cinc.com>,
        Taniya Das <quic_tdas@...cinc.com>,
        Jagadeesh Kona <quic_jkona@...cinc.com>,
        Satya Priya Kakitapalli
	<quic_skakitap@...cinc.com>,
        <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-clk@...r.kernel.org>,
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] clk: qcom: Add support for GCC on QCS8300



On 8/20/2024 4:32 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 20, 2024 at 03:38:39PM +0530, Imran Shaik wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 8/20/2024 3:27 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> On 20/08/2024 11:36, Imran Shaik wrote:
>>>> This series adds the dt-bindings and driver support for GCC on QCS8300 platform.
>>>>
>>>> Please note that this series is dependent on [1] which adds support
>>>> for QCS8275/QCS8300 SoC ID.
>>>>
>>>> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240814072806.4107079-1-quic_jingyw@quicinc.com/
>>>
>>> How do the depend? What is exactly the dependency?
>>>
>>> If so this cannot be merged...
>>>
>>
>> They are not functionally dependent, but we want to ensure the base QCS8300
>> changes to merge first and then our GCC changes. Hence added the dependency.
> 
> This does not work like that, these are different trees, even if they go
> via Bjorn.
> 
> Why do you insist on some specific workflow, different than every
> upstreaming process? What is so special here?
> 
> If you keep insisting, I will keep disagreeing, because it is not
> justified and just complicates things unnecessarily.

My bad, there is no dependency for clock tree actually, just wanted to 
provide the info that these GCC changes are for the newly defined SoC in 
the given series link. I will drop the dependency tag in the next series.

Thanks,
Imran