From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: mturquette@linaro.org (Mike Turquette)
Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 10:05:15 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] clk: reverse default clk provider initialization order in
 of_clk_init()
In-Reply-To: <7h1txi76rh.fsf@paris.lan>
References: <1395917012-23483-1-git-send-email-s.nawrocki@samsung.com>
 <20140329084147.5762.51815@quantum> <7h1txi76rh.fsf@paris.lan>
Message-ID: <20140331170515.5762.3498@quantum>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

Quoting Kevin Hilman (2014-03-31 08:00:18)
> Mike Turquette <mturquette@linaro.org> writes:
> 
> > Quoting Sylwester Nawrocki (2014-03-27 03:43:32)
> >> This restores the default clocks registration order as parsed from
> >> devicetree, i.e. as before commit 1771b10d605d26ccee771a7fb4b08718
> >> "clk: respect the clock dependencies in of_clk_init", for when there
> >> is no explicit parent clock dependencies between clock providers
> >> specified in the device tree.
> >> 
> >> It prevents regressions (boot failure, division by 0 errors) on
> >> imx and exynos platforms.
> >> 
> >> Signed-off-by: Sylwester Nawrocki <s.nawrocki@samsung.com>
> >
> > I pulled this into clk-next but it didn't seem to get picked up by
> > linux-next in time for today's build. Let's test the next linux-next to
> > insure that the regressions are gone. If not then I'll likely need to
> > drop "clk: respect the clock dependencies in of_clk_init" from clk-next
> > for 3.15.
> 
> It looks like all the boot failures caused by this problem are gone as
> of next-20140331[1], so it looks good to me.

Great, thanks for testing and letting us know!

Regards,
Mike

> 
> Kevin
> 
> [1] http://lists.linaro.org/pipermail/kernel-build-reports/2014-March/002988.html