From: t.figa@samsung.com (Tomasz Figa)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 0/2] ARM: Exynos4: Migrate to common clock framework.
Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2012 09:26:50 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2779610.RIGYtRk86h@amdc1227> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1349093361-18820-1-git-send-email-thomas.abraham@linaro.org>
Hi Chander, Thomas,
On Monday 01 of October 2012 17:39:19 chander.kashyap at linaro.org wrote:
> From: Thomas Abraham <thomas.abraham@linaro.org>
>
> This patch series migrates Exynos4 clock support to common clock
> framework. The first patch in this series removes the existing Exynos4
> clock support that uses the Samsung specific clock framework. The second
> patch in this series add Exynos4 clock support using common clock
> framework.
>
> Thomas Abraham (2):
> ARM: Exynos4: Remove Samsung clock type support
> ARM: Exynos4: Register clocks via common clock framework
I think the order of changes is a little bit off here:
- patch 1 will break all exynos4-based boards (what about bisects?)
- patch 2 will be still broken until all related drivers get converted to
use clk_prepare(_enable) and clk_(disable_)unprepare.
Shouldn't the order be exactly opposite, i.e.:
- all the patches for prepare/unprepare first
- then the patch adding common clock frameworks support for exynos4
(disabling the old clock code)
- and finally the patch removing remaining (disabled by previous patch)
code.
Also, I assume that these patches doesn't consider native device tree
support (without auxdata, using OF-based clock lookup), correct me if I'm
wrong. If I'm right, since Exynos SoCs are going to be DT-only, is there
really a point for adding common clock framework support for non-DT
platforms (which are going to be eventually dropped anyway)?
Best regards,
--
Tomasz Figa
Samsung Poland R&D Center
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-10-03 7:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-10-01 12:09 [PATCH 0/2] ARM: Exynos4: Migrate to common clock framework chander.kashyap at linaro.org
2012-10-01 12:09 ` [PATCH 1/2] ARM: Exynos4: Remove Samsung clock type support chander.kashyap at linaro.org
2012-10-01 12:09 ` [PATCH 2/2] ARM: Exynos4: Register clocks via common clock framework chander.kashyap at linaro.org
2012-10-03 8:25 ` Tomasz Figa
2012-10-08 6:34 ` Thomas Abraham
2012-10-03 10:40 ` Tomasz Figa
2012-10-08 6:34 ` Thomas Abraham
2012-10-08 7:31 ` Tomasz Figa
2012-10-05 15:21 ` Sylwester Nawrocki
2012-10-08 6:34 ` Thomas Abraham
2012-10-03 7:26 ` Tomasz Figa [this message]
2012-10-08 6:32 ` [PATCH 0/2] ARM: Exynos4: Migrate to " Thomas Abraham
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=2779610.RIGYtRk86h@amdc1227 \
--to=t.figa@samsung.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox