All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com>
To: Michael Turquette <mturquette@linaro.org>
Cc: Tang Yuantian <Yuantian.Tang@freescale.com>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
	Liberman Igal-B31950 <Igal.Liberman@freescale.com>,
	Bucur Madalin-Cristian-B32716 <madalin.bucur@freescale.com>,
	<linux-clk@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	<devicetree@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/8] clk: qoriq: Move chip-specific knowledge into driver
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2015 01:43:37 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1439621017.15601.23.camel@freescale.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150811182535.31346.52965@quantum>

On Tue, 2015-08-11 at 11:25 -0700, Michael Turquette wrote:
> Hi Scott,
> 
> Quoting Scott Wood (2015-06-18 19:49:10)
> > The existing device tree bindings are error-prone and inflexible. 
> > Correct the mistake by moving the knowledge into the driver, which
> > has more flexibility in describing the quirks of each chip.  This leaves
> > the device tree to its proper role of identifying a programming interface
> > rather than describing its individual registers.
> 
> Sorry for not responding to this one sooner. Fell through the cracks.
> 
> All of the changes to drives/clk/clk-qoriq.c look great to me. I assume
> you need to keep all of these patches together and want to the take
> through the freescale tree? If so feel free to add,
> 
> Acked-by: Michael Turquette <mturquette@baylibre.com>

I just sent a non-RFC v2, with improved compatibility with old device trees 
(especially ls1021a).  It depends on the cpufreq patch though (at least, to 
avoid breaking qoriq-cpufreq until that patch is merged), so I'll also need 
an ack from Rafael for that if I'm taking it through my tree.

-Scott

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Scott Wood <scottwood-KZfg59tc24xl57MIdRCFDg@public.gmane.org>
To: Michael Turquette <mturquette-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>
Cc: Tang Yuantian
	<Yuantian.Tang-KZfg59tc24xl57MIdRCFDg@public.gmane.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw-LthD3rsA81gm4RdzfppkhA@public.gmane.org>,
	Liberman Igal-B31950
	<Igal.Liberman-KZfg59tc24xl57MIdRCFDg@public.gmane.org>,
	Bucur Madalin-Cristian-B32716
	<madalin.bucur-KZfg59tc24xl57MIdRCFDg@public.gmane.org>,
	linux-clk-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
	linux-pm-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
	linuxppc-dev-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org,
	linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org,
	devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/8] clk: qoriq: Move chip-specific knowledge into driver
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2015 01:43:37 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1439621017.15601.23.camel@freescale.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150811182535.31346.52965@quantum>

On Tue, 2015-08-11 at 11:25 -0700, Michael Turquette wrote:
> Hi Scott,
> 
> Quoting Scott Wood (2015-06-18 19:49:10)
> > The existing device tree bindings are error-prone and inflexible. 
> > Correct the mistake by moving the knowledge into the driver, which
> > has more flexibility in describing the quirks of each chip.  This leaves
> > the device tree to its proper role of identifying a programming interface
> > rather than describing its individual registers.
> 
> Sorry for not responding to this one sooner. Fell through the cracks.
> 
> All of the changes to drives/clk/clk-qoriq.c look great to me. I assume
> you need to keep all of these patches together and want to the take
> through the freescale tree? If so feel free to add,
> 
> Acked-by: Michael Turquette <mturquette-rdvid1DuHRBWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>

I just sent a non-RFC v2, with improved compatibility with old device trees 
(especially ls1021a).  It depends on the cpufreq patch though (at least, to 
avoid breaking qoriq-cpufreq until that patch is merged), so I'll also need 
an ack from Rafael for that if I'm taking it through my tree.

-Scott

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: scottwood@freescale.com (Scott Wood)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [RFC PATCH 0/8] clk: qoriq: Move chip-specific knowledge into driver
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2015 01:43:37 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1439621017.15601.23.camel@freescale.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150811182535.31346.52965@quantum>

On Tue, 2015-08-11 at 11:25 -0700, Michael Turquette wrote:
> Hi Scott,
> 
> Quoting Scott Wood (2015-06-18 19:49:10)
> > The existing device tree bindings are error-prone and inflexible. 
> > Correct the mistake by moving the knowledge into the driver, which
> > has more flexibility in describing the quirks of each chip.  This leaves
> > the device tree to its proper role of identifying a programming interface
> > rather than describing its individual registers.
> 
> Sorry for not responding to this one sooner. Fell through the cracks.
> 
> All of the changes to drives/clk/clk-qoriq.c look great to me. I assume
> you need to keep all of these patches together and want to the take
> through the freescale tree? If so feel free to add,
> 
> Acked-by: Michael Turquette <mturquette@baylibre.com>

I just sent a non-RFC v2, with improved compatibility with old device trees 
(especially ls1021a).  It depends on the cpufreq patch though (at least, to 
avoid breaking qoriq-cpufreq until that patch is merged), so I'll also need 
an ack from Rafael for that if I'm taking it through my tree.

-Scott

  reply	other threads:[~2015-08-15  6:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 53+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-06-19  2:49 [RFC PATCH 0/8] clk: qoriq: Move chip-specific knowledge into driver Scott Wood
2015-06-19  2:49 ` Scott Wood
2015-06-19  2:49 ` Scott Wood
2015-06-19  2:49 ` Scott Wood
2015-06-19  2:49 ` [RFC PATCH 1/8] ARM: dts: ls1021a: Fix clockgen node Scott Wood
2015-06-19  2:49   ` Scott Wood
2015-06-19  2:49   ` Scott Wood
2015-06-19  2:49   ` Scott Wood
2015-06-19  2:49 ` [RFC PATCH 2/8] cpufreq: qoriq: Don't look at clock implementation details Scott Wood
2015-06-19  2:49   ` Scott Wood
2015-06-19  2:49   ` Scott Wood
2015-06-19  2:49   ` Scott Wood
2015-06-19  2:49 ` [RFC PATCH 3/8] powerpc/fsl: Move fsl_guts.h out of arch/powerpc Scott Wood
2015-06-19  2:49   ` Scott Wood
2015-06-19  2:49   ` Scott Wood
2015-06-19  2:49 ` [RFC PATCH 4/8] clk: qoriq: Move chip-specific knowledge into driver Scott Wood
2015-06-19  2:49   ` Scott Wood
2015-06-19  2:49   ` Scott Wood
2015-06-19  2:49 ` [RFC PATCH 5/8] clk: qoriq: Redirect legacy clock nodes to new clocks Scott Wood
2015-06-19  2:49   ` Scott Wood
2015-06-19  2:49   ` Scott Wood
2015-06-19  2:49 ` [RFC PATCH 6/8] cpufreq: qoriq: Remove frequency masking and minimum Scott Wood
2015-06-19  2:49   ` Scott Wood
2015-06-19  2:49   ` Scott Wood
2015-06-19  2:49 ` [RFC PATCH 7/8] clk: qoriq: Expose OF clocks directly from the clockgen node Scott Wood
2015-06-19  2:49   ` Scott Wood
2015-06-19  2:49   ` Scott Wood
2015-06-19  2:49 ` [RFC PATCH 8/8] powerpc/fsl: Use new clockgen binding Scott Wood
2015-06-19  2:49   ` Scott Wood
2015-06-19  2:49   ` Scott Wood
2015-07-30 15:32   ` Liberman Igal
2015-07-30 15:32     ` Liberman Igal
2015-07-30 15:32     ` Liberman Igal
2015-07-30 15:32     ` Liberman Igal
2015-08-11 18:25 ` [RFC PATCH 0/8] clk: qoriq: Move chip-specific knowledge into driver Michael Turquette
2015-08-11 18:25   ` Michael Turquette
2015-08-11 18:25   ` Michael Turquette
2015-08-11 18:25   ` Michael Turquette
2015-08-15  6:43   ` Scott Wood [this message]
2015-08-15  6:43     ` Scott Wood
2015-08-15  6:43     ` Scott Wood
2015-10-02  0:23   ` Scott Wood
2015-10-02  0:23     ` Scott Wood
2015-10-02  0:23     ` Scott Wood
2015-10-02  0:26   ` Scott Wood
2015-10-02  0:26     ` Scott Wood
2015-10-02  0:26     ` Scott Wood
2015-10-09 23:57     ` Scott Wood
2015-10-09 23:57       ` Scott Wood
2015-10-09 23:57       ` Scott Wood
2015-10-22 10:11       ` Michael Turquette
2015-10-22 10:11         ` Michael Turquette
2015-10-22 10:11         ` Michael Turquette

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1439621017.15601.23.camel@freescale.com \
    --to=scottwood@freescale.com \
    --cc=Igal.Liberman@freescale.com \
    --cc=Yuantian.Tang@freescale.com \
    --cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-clk@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=madalin.bucur@freescale.com \
    --cc=mturquette@linaro.org \
    --cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.