From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AFDF9CAC59A for ; Wed, 17 Sep 2025 04:49:51 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender:List-Subscribe:List-Help :List-Post:List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:Message-ID:Date:To:Cc:From: Subject:References:In-Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From: Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=6iKUJefCEfN6dN0bjyWGNmIlwawpbU6TIZlivM2qAv0=; b=4pzklc44FshEOpinXhdkS/r/E5 bOJp5ChfYH2toW+9PYedxOF8xEwU8a3e4dcMaeBdpddxhB64ptNhIT/hasQwMh/VdIeOAvjdw5Su3 ic/dFYHIx/2eL1anAZZjjU9ZG4ukaWn5qWysmEE1ZvngGCmAqC7l+leqoZ7Z+Daujd+nDCtKavLm+ vv8CYS/qqm8/W7ehJz+P/DgzDCAhXZS3SSw4uaKxy1nsslqhAKvXlBgpJeR37AbTkn11s3cmt9h/m YXbG4vPhElg70iwGGqD1+h56eh0xOt4s062OEGlr6+uDUmHySjB6RrU4m3Os1V17RBVD/7x71F4NF 8CMT95Ag==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.98.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1uyk6x-0000000ABCW-00zB; Wed, 17 Sep 2025 04:49:43 +0000 Received: from sea.source.kernel.org ([2600:3c0a:e001:78e:0:1991:8:25]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.98.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1uyk6t-0000000ABB2-2VVH for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 17 Sep 2025 04:49:40 +0000 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (transwarp.subspace.kernel.org [100.75.92.58]) by sea.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32ECC43286; Wed, 17 Sep 2025 04:49:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 00976C4CEF0; Wed, 17 Sep 2025 04:49:37 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1758084578; bh=6iKUJefCEfN6dN0bjyWGNmIlwawpbU6TIZlivM2qAv0=; h=In-Reply-To:References:Subject:From:Cc:To:Date:From; b=kgixDBAV4DcV+vsxuyDQuN9mAKXk+Fwp1Rj7x5YjbvblULsWAjF/aqf4SdHA+PpDb xk6vGGX2Pdx3p0E6YVCaxuf9Npu0VVrTCj+g6jBSg4IS/a+GDGRM0aEzmu6edX0sb+ TT0qZcVpdp0GVLpmFTHtS2mZjfEa8B03vsV1Kh5dlnL8V6JkVuZxgJJstbKNy4AUDl PJP3twPd6gCUe25poKni14DRAuiG/qn+PKKys2pNGF20j8V0BePISlvbx/+kDqj6GY NTzE0nbNhO6j5bAs55i9Ua3Eo4y5mz5bdi9u0ho52p1NplYz4sR4/DrcwyfKSj2soL eEeRl/PG2KFpQ== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In-Reply-To: <0695ca65-536c-48d9-ad1b-49452e67a6f9@microchip.com> References: <20250916080545.9310-1-nicolas.ferre@microchip.com> <0695ca65-536c-48d9-ad1b-49452e67a6f9@microchip.com> Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] ARM: microchip: clk for 6.18 #1 From: Stephen Boyd Cc: Linux Kernel list , linux-arm-kernel , Alexandre Belloni , Conor Dooley , Claudiu Beznea , oe-kbuild-all@lists.linux.dev, llvm@lists.linux.dev, kbuild test robot To: Arnd Bergmann , Nicolas Ferre , SoC Team , linux-clk@vger.kernel.org, mturquette@baylibre.com Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2025 21:49:37 -0700 Message-ID: <175808457715.4354.11044142356915096975@lazor> User-Agent: alot/0.11 X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20250916_214939_656794_24F81C3D X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 15.81 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org Quoting Nicolas Ferre (2025-09-16 06:19:11) > On 16/09/2025 at 10:05, nicolas.ferre@microchip.com wrote: > > From: Nicolas Ferre > >=20 > > Dear clock maintainers, > >=20 > > Here are the first clk changes for 6.18. > > I don't think they have conflict with changes for the deprecated round_= rate() > > to determine_rate() topic. > > They are in linux-next for a couple of days. >=20 > But... this series depends on this patch: > https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250827145427.46819-4-nicolas.ferre@microchip.= com >=20 > Which will be part of a pull-request to-be-sent soon to arm-soc (which=20 > is part of linux-next, so the build error doesn't appear there). >=20 > Once the pull-request is done, do you prefer that I do an immutable=20 > branch between CLK and ARM, that I queue this at91 PM patch into the clk = > pull-request or that everything goes through arm-soc? Whatever is required to build the code should be included in the PR. If the same commit goes into arm-soc tree that's OK, just make sure the branches aren't broken if you checkout a commit anywhere along the branch that is sent to clk or arm-soc trees. Broken includes functionally broken.