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: Sat, 10 May 2014 01:11:45 +0200 Message-ID: <536D60B1.2070906@gmail.com> References: <2104342.rkElQpXtvM@phil> <1399654181.19276.2.camel@x220> <536D1611.4010301@gmail.com> <1428172.jtv2HGWM9N@phil> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: Received: from mail-ee0-f54.google.com ([74.125.83.54]:36633 "EHLO mail-ee0-f54.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752172AbaEIXL4 (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 May 2014 19:11:56 -0400 Received: by mail-ee0-f54.google.com with SMTP id b57so3050712eek.27 for ; Fri, 09 May 2014 16:11:55 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1428172.jtv2HGWM9N@phil> Sender: linux-samsung-soc-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Heiko_St=FCbner?= Cc: Paul Bolle , linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org, t.figa@samsung.com, Kukjin Kim , mturquette@linaro.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Hi Heiko, On 10.05.2014 01:07, Heiko St=FCbner wrote: > Am Freitag, 9. Mai 2014, 19:53:21 schrieb Tomasz Figa: >> On 09.05.2014 18:49, Paul Bolle wrote: >>> On Wed, 2014-04-23 at 22:09 +0200, Heiko St=FCbner wrote: >>>> Add platform device and select the correct implementation automati= cally >>>> depending on wether the old samsung_clock or the common clock fram= ework >>>> is enabled. >>>> >>>> This is only done for machines already using the old dclk implemen= tation, >>>> 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, > > I remember seeing patches regarding more than one clk-samsung clock p= roviders. > Do you need any additional changes for s3c24xx from me for this? > Yes, that's the problem here. If you could do it, I would appreciate it= ,=20 but if you don't have time then I can handle this. The changes needed=20 are mostly trivial - basically every common samsung_clk function gets=20 new argument to a context structure. The branch to base on would be=20 for_3.16/exynos5260 in samsung-clk tree. > >> b) the DT binding added by patch 4/9 has not been acked . > > I'm not 100% sure if this is necessary, as the binding is similar to = most > other Samsung bindings and looking through recent clock binding chang= es I > didn't find any that seemed to have a special dt-maintainer ack - inc= luding > Exynos ones. Also if I remember correctly there was this "if we don't= respond, > carry on" policy around :-) . > Well, for me this could go as is, but rules should be followed and the=20 rules are ACK or 3 weeks and a ping without response. So we need to wai= t=20 at least to next Wednesday to bypass DT review. Best regards, Tomasz From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: tomasz.figa@gmail.com (Tomasz Figa) Date: Sat, 10 May 2014 01:11:45 +0200 Subject: [PATCH v2.1 3/9] ARM: S3C24XX: enable usage of common dclk if common clock framework is enabled In-Reply-To: <1428172.jtv2HGWM9N@phil> References: <2104342.rkElQpXtvM@phil> <1399654181.19276.2.camel@x220> <536D1611.4010301@gmail.com> <1428172.jtv2HGWM9N@phil> Message-ID: <536D60B1.2070906@gmail.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Hi Heiko, On 10.05.2014 01:07, Heiko St?bner wrote: > Am Freitag, 9. Mai 2014, 19:53:21 schrieb Tomasz Figa: >> 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, > > I remember seeing patches regarding more than one clk-samsung clock providers. > Do you need any additional changes for s3c24xx from me for this? > Yes, that's the problem here. If you could do it, I would appreciate it, but if you don't have time then I can handle this. The changes needed are mostly trivial - basically every common samsung_clk function gets new argument to a context structure. The branch to base on would be for_3.16/exynos5260 in samsung-clk tree. > >> b) the DT binding added by patch 4/9 has not been acked . > > I'm not 100% sure if this is necessary, as the binding is similar to most > other Samsung bindings and looking through recent clock binding changes I > didn't find any that seemed to have a special dt-maintainer ack - including > Exynos ones. Also if I remember correctly there was this "if we don't respond, > carry on" policy around :-) . > Well, for me this could go as is, but rules should be followed and the rules are ACK or 3 weeks and a ping without response. So we need to wait at least to next Wednesday to bypass DT review. Best regards, Tomasz