From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: mturquette@linaro.org (Mike Turquette) Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2013 15:25:39 -0700 Subject: [PATCH REPOST v2] clk: add table lookup to mux In-Reply-To: <514CC21E.40206@wwwdotorg.org> References: <1363954078-29952-1-git-send-email-pdeschrijver@nvidia.com> <514C813E.1070603@wwwdotorg.org> <20130322202522.834.24639@quantum> <514CC21E.40206@wwwdotorg.org> Message-ID: <20130322222539.834.66626@quantum> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Quoting Stephen Warren (2013-03-22 13:42:06) > On 03/22/2013 02:25 PM, Mike Turquette wrote: > > Quoting Stephen Warren (2013-03-22 09:05:18) > >> On 03/22/2013 06:07 AM, Peter De Schrijver wrote: > >>> Add a table lookup feature to the mux clock. Also allow arbitrary masks > >>> instead of the width. This will be used by some clocks on Tegra114. Also > >>> adapt the tegra periph clk because it uses struct clk_mux directly. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Peter De Schrijver > >> > >> Tested-by: Stephen Warren > > > > Thanks for the patch. Taken into clk-next. > > Great. Recall this is a dependency for the Tegra114 clock series that I > was planning on taking through the Tegra tree. Should I just merge your > whole clk-next into the Tegra tree as a basis for the Tegra114 clock > branch, or should this one patch be put into a separate topic branch so > I don't pick up everything? The latter would reduce the > inter-dependencies, and allow the merge to happen earlier. Obviously, > I'll wait until you let me know the appropriate branch is stable before > doing the merge. Thanks. I want to get a little more exposure in linux-next before I create a branch named clk-for-3.10 will never be rebased. Assuming there are no issues then probably the middle of next week I will push commit ce4f3313 and it will be considered immutable. As always the tip of clk-next might be rebased, but never past the top commit in the clk-for-x.y commit, which is frozen. Regards, Mike