From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mho-02-ewr.mailhop.org ([204.13.248.72]:38973 "EHLO mho-02-ewr.mailhop.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751423Ab3EPPHB (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 May 2013 11:07:01 -0400 Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 11:06:16 -0400 From: Jason Cooper To: Sebastian Hesselbarth Cc: Thomas Petazzoni , Mike Turquette , Andrew Lunn , Gregory Clement , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Arnd Bergmann , Olof Johansson , Bjorn Helgaas , Grant Likely , Lior Amsalem , Maen Suleiman , Tawfik Bayouk , Jason Gunthorpe , linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, Thierry Reding , Rob Herring , Ezequiel Garcia , devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org Subject: Re: [PATCHv9 5/9] clk: mvebu: create parent-child relation for PCIe clocks on Armada 370 Message-ID: <20130516150616.GD6563@titan.lakedaemon.net> References: <1368624323-24311-1-git-send-email-thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com> <1368624323-24311-6-git-send-email-thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com> <20130515214154.12127.73539@quantum> <20130516094417.24b1ca0d@skate> <51949830.70306@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <51949830.70306@gmail.com> Sender: linux-pci-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Mike, Sebastian, On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 10:26:24AM +0200, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote: > On 05/16/2013 09:44 AM, Thomas Petazzoni wrote: > >Dear Mike Turquette, > > > >On Wed, 15 May 2013 14:41:54 -0700, Mike Turquette wrote: > >>Quoting Thomas Petazzoni (2013-05-15 06:25:19) > >>>The Armada 370 has two gatable clocks for each PCIe interface, and we > >>>want both of them to be enabled. We therefore make one of the two > >>>clocks a child of the other, as we did for the sataX and sataXlnk > >>>clocks on Armada XP. > >> > >>Ack for patches #5 and #6. Do you want me to take them? Thanks for the Ack! > >I don't know, I guess with your Ack, it would be easier to carry them > >through the Marvell maintainers and then the arm-soc tree, so that we > >can test arm-soc and have all the pieces needed in here. > > > >That said, Sebastian Hesselbarth has submitted a big rework of the > >mvebu clock drivers, which would conflict with this patch, and > >Sebastian's rework would most likely go through your tree. If that's > >the case, I guess it would be better to let you take #5 and #6 in this > >patch series. > > I also requested to take the restructure patches through ARM tree. They > are only touching files in drivers/clk/mvebu and by taking them through > ARM, we can update PCIe clock patches easily. The dependency between > Thomas' and my patches basically is that I renamed files that Thomas > now commits to. (I switched clk/mvebu from per-function files to per-soc > files). I agree. My heart jumped into my throat a little there :) Mike, if it's ok with you, I'd prefer to take these through arm-soc. Any merge conflicts should be minimal. And at any rate, resolving the conflicts are *much* easier to handle than having arm-soc depend on an outside tree (then Linus has to take care in the order he merges them, no rebasing for clk tree, dogs and cats living together, etc ;-) ) thx, Jason. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: jason@lakedaemon.net (Jason Cooper) Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 11:06:16 -0400 Subject: [PATCHv9 5/9] clk: mvebu: create parent-child relation for PCIe clocks on Armada 370 In-Reply-To: <51949830.70306@gmail.com> References: <1368624323-24311-1-git-send-email-thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com> <1368624323-24311-6-git-send-email-thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com> <20130515214154.12127.73539@quantum> <20130516094417.24b1ca0d@skate> <51949830.70306@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20130516150616.GD6563@titan.lakedaemon.net> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Mike, Sebastian, On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 10:26:24AM +0200, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote: > On 05/16/2013 09:44 AM, Thomas Petazzoni wrote: > >Dear Mike Turquette, > > > >On Wed, 15 May 2013 14:41:54 -0700, Mike Turquette wrote: > >>Quoting Thomas Petazzoni (2013-05-15 06:25:19) > >>>The Armada 370 has two gatable clocks for each PCIe interface, and we > >>>want both of them to be enabled. We therefore make one of the two > >>>clocks a child of the other, as we did for the sataX and sataXlnk > >>>clocks on Armada XP. > >> > >>Ack for patches #5 and #6. Do you want me to take them? Thanks for the Ack! > >I don't know, I guess with your Ack, it would be easier to carry them > >through the Marvell maintainers and then the arm-soc tree, so that we > >can test arm-soc and have all the pieces needed in here. > > > >That said, Sebastian Hesselbarth has submitted a big rework of the > >mvebu clock drivers, which would conflict with this patch, and > >Sebastian's rework would most likely go through your tree. If that's > >the case, I guess it would be better to let you take #5 and #6 in this > >patch series. > > I also requested to take the restructure patches through ARM tree. They > are only touching files in drivers/clk/mvebu and by taking them through > ARM, we can update PCIe clock patches easily. The dependency between > Thomas' and my patches basically is that I renamed files that Thomas > now commits to. (I switched clk/mvebu from per-function files to per-soc > files). I agree. My heart jumped into my throat a little there :) Mike, if it's ok with you, I'd prefer to take these through arm-soc. Any merge conflicts should be minimal. And at any rate, resolving the conflicts are *much* easier to handle than having arm-soc depend on an outside tree (then Linus has to take care in the order he merges them, no rebasing for clk tree, dogs and cats living together, etc ;-) ) thx, Jason. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jason Cooper Subject: Re: [PATCHv9 5/9] clk: mvebu: create parent-child relation for PCIe clocks on Armada 370 Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 11:06:16 -0400 Message-ID: <20130516150616.GD6563@titan.lakedaemon.net> References: <1368624323-24311-1-git-send-email-thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com> <1368624323-24311-6-git-send-email-thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com> <20130515214154.12127.73539@quantum> <20130516094417.24b1ca0d@skate> <51949830.70306@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <51949830.70306-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: devicetree-discuss-bounces+gldd-devicetree-discuss=m.gmane.org-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org Sender: "devicetree-discuss" To: Sebastian Hesselbarth Cc: Andrew Lunn , Mike Turquette , Tawfik Bayouk , Maen Suleiman , linux-pci-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, devicetree-discuss-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org, Thierry Reding , Rob Herring , Lior Amsalem , Bjorn Helgaas , linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org, Jason Gunthorpe List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org Mike, Sebastian, On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 10:26:24AM +0200, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote: > On 05/16/2013 09:44 AM, Thomas Petazzoni wrote: > >Dear Mike Turquette, > > > >On Wed, 15 May 2013 14:41:54 -0700, Mike Turquette wrote: > >>Quoting Thomas Petazzoni (2013-05-15 06:25:19) > >>>The Armada 370 has two gatable clocks for each PCIe interface, and we > >>>want both of them to be enabled. We therefore make one of the two > >>>clocks a child of the other, as we did for the sataX and sataXlnk > >>>clocks on Armada XP. > >> > >>Ack for patches #5 and #6. Do you want me to take them? Thanks for the Ack! > >I don't know, I guess with your Ack, it would be easier to carry them > >through the Marvell maintainers and then the arm-soc tree, so that we > >can test arm-soc and have all the pieces needed in here. > > > >That said, Sebastian Hesselbarth has submitted a big rework of the > >mvebu clock drivers, which would conflict with this patch, and > >Sebastian's rework would most likely go through your tree. If that's > >the case, I guess it would be better to let you take #5 and #6 in this > >patch series. > > I also requested to take the restructure patches through ARM tree. They > are only touching files in drivers/clk/mvebu and by taking them through > ARM, we can update PCIe clock patches easily. The dependency between > Thomas' and my patches basically is that I renamed files that Thomas > now commits to. (I switched clk/mvebu from per-function files to per-soc > files). I agree. My heart jumped into my throat a little there :) Mike, if it's ok with you, I'd prefer to take these through arm-soc. Any merge conflicts should be minimal. And at any rate, resolving the conflicts are *much* easier to handle than having arm-soc depend on an outside tree (then Linus has to take care in the order he merges them, no rebasing for clk tree, dogs and cats living together, etc ;-) ) thx, Jason.