From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tomasz Figa Subject: Re: [PATCH v2.1 3/9] ARM: S3C24XX: enable usage of common dclk if common clock framework is enabled Date: Fri, 09 May 2014 19:53:21 +0200 Message-ID: <536D1611.4010301@gmail.com> References: <2104342.rkElQpXtvM@phil> <3888936.TSFL3ZW3mv@phil> <3835735.0k9HAgQHzN@phil> <1399654181.19276.2.camel@x220> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: Received: from mail-ee0-f42.google.com ([74.125.83.42]:45573 "EHLO mail-ee0-f42.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756942AbaEIRxc (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 May 2014 13:53:32 -0400 Received: by mail-ee0-f42.google.com with SMTP id d49so2924954eek.29 for ; Fri, 09 May 2014 10:53:31 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1399654181.19276.2.camel@x220> Sender: linux-samsung-soc-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org To: Paul Bolle , =?UTF-8?B?SGVpa28gU3TDvGJuZXI=?= Cc: linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org, t.figa@samsung.com, Kukjin Kim , mturquette@linaro.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org On 09.05.2014 18:49, Paul Bolle wrote: > On Wed, 2014-04-23 at 22:09 +0200, Heiko St=C3=BCbner wrote: >> Add platform device and select the correct implementation automatica= lly >> depending on wether the old samsung_clock or the common clock framew= ork >> is enabled. >> >> This is only done for machines already using the old dclk implementa= tion, >> as everybody else should move to use dt anyway. >> >> The machine-specific settings for the external clocks will have to b= e set >> by somebody with knowledge about the specific hardware. >> >> Signed-off-by: Heiko Stuebner >> Reviewed-by: Tomasz Figa > > It seems this one just hit linux-next (in next-20140509). > Which is bad, because: a) it conflicts with patches already applied in samsung-clk tree, b) the DT binding added by patch 4/9 has not been acked . Kukjin, might I ask you to drop this series from your tree and let me=20 send you a pull request with necessary dependencies and this series=20 applied properly to resolve merge conflicts, as I suggested before in=20 one of my replies to this thread? Best regards, Tomasz From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: tomasz.figa@gmail.com (Tomasz Figa) Date: Fri, 09 May 2014 19:53:21 +0200 Subject: [PATCH v2.1 3/9] ARM: S3C24XX: enable usage of common dclk if common clock framework is enabled In-Reply-To: <1399654181.19276.2.camel@x220> References: <2104342.rkElQpXtvM@phil> <3888936.TSFL3ZW3mv@phil> <3835735.0k9HAgQHzN@phil> <1399654181.19276.2.camel@x220> Message-ID: <536D1611.4010301@gmail.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 09.05.2014 18:49, Paul Bolle wrote: > On Wed, 2014-04-23 at 22:09 +0200, Heiko St?bner wrote: >> Add platform device and select the correct implementation automatically >> depending on wether the old samsung_clock or the common clock framework >> is enabled. >> >> This is only done for machines already using the old dclk implementation, >> as everybody else should move to use dt anyway. >> >> The machine-specific settings for the external clocks will have to be set >> by somebody with knowledge about the specific hardware. >> >> Signed-off-by: Heiko Stuebner >> Reviewed-by: Tomasz Figa > > It seems this one just hit linux-next (in next-20140509). > Which is bad, because: a) it conflicts with patches already applied in samsung-clk tree, b) the DT binding added by patch 4/9 has not been acked . Kukjin, might I ask you to drop this series from your tree and let me send you a pull request with necessary dependencies and this series applied properly to resolve merge conflicts, as I suggested before in one of my replies to this thread? Best regards, Tomasz