From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Benoit Cousson Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 16/23] ARM: OMAP2+: clock data: Merge utmi_px_gfclk into usb_host_hs_utmi_px_clk Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2012 09:13:06 +0100 Message-ID: <50CED412.7060407@ti.com> References: <1355134833-5199-1-git-send-email-rogerq@ti.com> <1355134833-5199-17-git-send-email-rogerq@ti.com> <20121214182855.GB4989@atomide.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Paul Walmsley Cc: Tony Lindgren , Roger Quadros , balbi@ti.com, sameo@linux.intel.com, keshava_mgowda@ti.com, sshtylyov@mvista.com, bjorn@mork.no, linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Rajendra Nayak , Mike Turquette List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org Hi, On 12/14/2012 07:44 PM, Paul Walmsley wrote: > Hi >=20 > On Fri, 14 Dec 2012, Tony Lindgren wrote: >=20 >> Paul, what about this patch? Looks like you've acked the other clock= =20 >> patches in this series but not this one? >=20 > I commented on it briefly here: >=20 > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/1838111/ >=20 > Maybe Beno=EEt could comment here, but it looks to me (based on a=20 > superficial look at the hardware clock tree data) that these clock no= des=20 > should exist. In an ideal world, we'd be able to get back to the=20 > autogeneration of this clock data. I'm not sure to understand either the rational for that patch. What the point of merging the two nodes? I mean, we can do it, but AFAIR, we have always decided to use atomic node instead of big nodes that handle everything. Regards, Benoit From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: b-cousson@ti.com (Benoit Cousson) Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2012 09:13:06 +0100 Subject: [PATCH v4 16/23] ARM: OMAP2+: clock data: Merge utmi_px_gfclk into usb_host_hs_utmi_px_clk In-Reply-To: References: <1355134833-5199-1-git-send-email-rogerq@ti.com> <1355134833-5199-17-git-send-email-rogerq@ti.com> <20121214182855.GB4989@atomide.com> Message-ID: <50CED412.7060407@ti.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Hi, On 12/14/2012 07:44 PM, Paul Walmsley wrote: > Hi > > On Fri, 14 Dec 2012, Tony Lindgren wrote: > >> Paul, what about this patch? Looks like you've acked the other clock >> patches in this series but not this one? > > I commented on it briefly here: > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/1838111/ > > Maybe Beno?t could comment here, but it looks to me (based on a > superficial look at the hardware clock tree data) that these clock nodes > should exist. In an ideal world, we'd be able to get back to the > autogeneration of this clock data. I'm not sure to understand either the rational for that patch. What the point of merging the two nodes? I mean, we can do it, but AFAIR, we have always decided to use atomic node instead of big nodes that handle everything. Regards, Benoit From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751826Ab2LQIN3 (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Dec 2012 03:13:29 -0500 Received: from arroyo.ext.ti.com ([192.94.94.40]:35149 "EHLO arroyo.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750813Ab2LQIN1 (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Dec 2012 03:13:27 -0500 Message-ID: <50CED412.7060407@ti.com> Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2012 09:13:06 +0100 From: Benoit Cousson Organization: Texas Instruments User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Paul Walmsley CC: Tony Lindgren , Roger Quadros , , , , , , , , , , Rajendra Nayak , Mike Turquette Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 16/23] ARM: OMAP2+: clock data: Merge utmi_px_gfclk into usb_host_hs_utmi_px_clk References: <1355134833-5199-1-git-send-email-rogerq@ti.com> <1355134833-5199-17-git-send-email-rogerq@ti.com> <20121214182855.GB4989@atomide.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, On 12/14/2012 07:44 PM, Paul Walmsley wrote: > Hi > > On Fri, 14 Dec 2012, Tony Lindgren wrote: > >> Paul, what about this patch? Looks like you've acked the other clock >> patches in this series but not this one? > > I commented on it briefly here: > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/1838111/ > > Maybe Benoît could comment here, but it looks to me (based on a > superficial look at the hardware clock tree data) that these clock nodes > should exist. In an ideal world, we'd be able to get back to the > autogeneration of this clock data. I'm not sure to understand either the rational for that patch. What the point of merging the two nodes? I mean, we can do it, but AFAIR, we have always decided to use atomic node instead of big nodes that handle everything. Regards, Benoit