[PATCH] OMAP3 clock: remove obsolete comment

[PATCH] OMAP3 clock: remove obsolete comment

[Paul Walmsley]

Hello Michael,

thanks for the patch.  I've queued it for 3.7 after writing a changelog.  
Two minor comments for future patches: we don't accept patches with a 
non-null changelog - usually just something brief works fine.  Also Tony 
wants all OMAP patches to be cc'ed to the linux-arm-kernel mailing list.

regards,

- Paul


Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2012 14:28:42 +0200
From: Michael Jones <michael.jones@matrix-vision.de>
To: linux-omap at vger.kernel.org
Cc: Paul Walmsley <paul@pwsan.com>
Subject: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP3: clock data: remove obsolete comment

The file is currently called 'clock3xxx_data.c', so this comment is
out of date.

Signed-off-by: Michael Jones <michael.jones@matrix-vision.de>
[paul at pwsan.com: wrote changelog]
Signed-off-by: Paul Walmsley <paul@pwsan.com>

---
 arch/arm/mach-omap2/clock3xxx_data.c |    1 -
 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/clock3xxx_data.c b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/clock3xxx_data.c
index 1efdec2..025b5d9 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/clock3xxx_data.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/clock3xxx_data.c
@@ -3223,7 +3223,6 @@ static struct clk dummy_apb_pclk = {
  * clkdev
  */
 
-/* XXX At some point we should rename this file to clock3xxx_data.c */
 static struct omap_clk omap3xxx_clks[] = {
 	CLK(NULL,	"apb_pclk",	&dummy_apb_pclk,	CK_3XXX),
 	CLK(NULL,	"omap_32k_fck",	&omap_32k_fck,	CK_3XXX),
-- 
1.7.4.1

[PATCH] OMAP3 clock: remove obsolete comment

[Michael Jones]

Hi Paul,

On 07/26/2012 09:55 PM, Paul Walmsley wrote:
> 
> Hello Michael,
> 
> thanks for the patch.  I've queued it for 3.7 after writing a changelog.
> Two minor comments for future patches: we don't accept patches with a
> non-null changelog - usually just something brief works fine.  Also Tony
> wants all OMAP patches to be cc'ed to the linux-arm-kernel mailing list.
> 
> regards,
> 
> - Paul

Thanks for the comments, I'll adhere to them in the future.  I assume you
meant you _only_ accept patches with a non-null changelog.  I referred to
http://omappedia.org/wiki/Releasing_to_Linux_kernel_using_patches_and_emails
before my submission, and didn't see these two points.  A few Q's:

Can I add these two points to that Wiki page?  Or is there a more
authoritative checklist somewhere?

Why is it queued for 3.7?  I thought 3.6 was in the works?

Where is it queued?

thanks,
Michael

MATRIX VISION GmbH, Talstrasse 16, DE-71570 Oppenweiler
Registergericht: Amtsgericht Stuttgart, HRB 271090
Geschaeftsfuehrer: Gerhard Thullner, Werner Armingeon, Uwe Furtner, Erhard Meier

[PATCH] OMAP3 clock: remove obsolete comment

[Paul Walmsley]

Hello Michael,

On Fri, 27 Jul 2012, Michael Jones wrote:

> Thanks for the comments, I'll adhere to them in the future.  I assume you
> meant you _only_ accept patches with a non-null changelog.

Indeed, that's right, I misstated it.

> I referred to 
> http://omappedia.org/wiki/Releasing_to_Linux_kernel_using_patches_and_emails 
> before my submission, and didn't see these two points.  A few Q's:
> 
> Can I add these two points to that Wiki page?

Sounds reasonable, but I don't know who maintains that page.

> Or is there a more authoritative checklist somewhere?

There is; it's Documentation/SubmittingPatches which can be viewed here:

http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git;a=blob;f=Documentation/SubmittingPatches

> Why is it queued for 3.7?

It is a low-priority fix (but valuable nonetheless, of course).

> I thought 3.6 was in the works?

Most of the significant new patches for 3.6 were tested and queued several 
weeks ago.  Now we are queuing bugfix and regression patches for 3.6-rc 
and new features and low-priority fixes for 3.7.

> Where is it queued?

It is currently queued in a git branch on my local drive.


- Paul

[PATCH] OMAP3 clock: remove obsolete comment

[Michael Jones]

Hi Paul,

Thanks for the explanations.

On 07/27/2012 09:14 AM, Paul Walmsley wrote:
> Hello Michael,
>

[snip]

> There is; it's Documentation/SubmittingPatches which can be viewed here:
>
> http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git;a=blob;f=Documentation/SubmittingPatches

I looked at that, too, but it wasn't clear to me that even such a 
trivial patch should have an "explanation body", as the description
there assumes a functional change is being introduced.  Now I know!

[snip]
>
> - Paul
>

-Michael

MATRIX VISION GmbH, Talstrasse 16, DE-71570 Oppenweiler
Registergericht: Amtsgericht Stuttgart, HRB 271090
Geschaeftsfuehrer: Gerhard Thullner, Werner Armingeon, Uwe Furtner, Erhard Meier