From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: tony@atomide.com (Tony Lindgren) Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2017 07:35:39 -0700 Subject: [PATCHv2 8/9] ARM: dts: omap4: add clkctrl nodes In-Reply-To: References: <1489741781-12816-1-git-send-email-t-kristo@ti.com> <1489741781-12816-9-git-send-email-t-kristo@ti.com> <20170317154333.GW20572@atomide.com> <9456caee-4f45-044a-0b2e-305fa2d0d274@ti.com> Message-ID: <20170320143538.GH20572@atomide.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org * Tero Kristo [170320 06:27]: > On 17/03/17 23:41, Tero Kristo wrote: > > On 17/03/17 17:43, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > > * Tero Kristo [170317 02:12]: > > > > Add clkctrl nodes for OMAP4 SoC. These are going to be acting as > > > > replacement for part of the existing clock data and the existing > > > > clkctrl hooks under hwmod data. > > > > > > It seems to be actually this patch in the series that breaks booting > > > if the last patch in this series is not applied. > > > > Yea I guess we need to squash this and patch #9, I'll double check next > > week. Sorry about not catching this one. > > Yes, patch #8 and #9 must be squashed. What happens with patch #8 alone, is > that you get all the clkctrl clocks registered, but as nobody is using them, > the clock core disables them later on in clk_disable_unused. So how hard would it to do a mixed approach where we don't need to have everything in place in the dts in order to flip a SoC? This atomic transaction worries me.. Regards, Tony