[GIT PULL] Samsung clock changes for v3.15

[t.figa@samsung.com (Tomasz Figa)]

On 19.03.2014 05:07, Mike Turquette wrote:
> Quoting Tomasz Figa (2014-03-18 18:19:25)
>> Hi Mike,
>>
>> On 19.03.2014 02:06, Mike Turquette wrote:
>>> Quoting Tomasz Figa (2014-03-17 10:59:57)
>>>> The following changes since commit 38dbfb59d1175ef458d006556061adeaa8751b72:
>>>>
>>>>     Linus 3.14-rc1 (2014-02-02 16:42:13 -0800)
>>>>
>>>> are available in the git repository at:
>>>>
>>>>     git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tfiga/samsung-clk.git tags/for_3.15/samsung-clk
>>>>
>>>> for you to fetch changes up to 70d1cf1c85486753fec0c60a9a093bdfe42b89b4:
>>>>
>>>>     Merge branch 'for_3.15/misc' into samsung-next (2014-03-17 13:00:01 +0100)
>>>>
>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> Samsung clock patches for v3.15.
>>>>
>>>> Due to dependencies, most of the patches already went through linux-samsung
>>>> tree, so this pull request is rather small.
>>>
>>> I'm a bit confused. This PR is not really small (32 patches) and it
>>> covers more stuff from arch/arm that I usually take.
>>>
>>>> It contains various patches
>>>> collected since the last merge window:
>>>>
>>>> 1) non-critical fixes (without need to push to stable):
>>>>
>>>> 220b0cc clk: samsung: Initialize clock table with error pointers
>>>> 58d83cb clk: exynos-5420: Fix VPLL lock offset
>>>> 3299bc3 clk: samsung: fixed compiler warning [-Wpointer-to-int-cast]
>>>>
>>>> 2) clock driver extensions:
>>>>
>>>> db40d0c clk: samsung exynos5250/5420: Add gate clock for SSS module
>>>> d8b9731 clk/samsung: add support for multiple clock providers
>>>> 45af130 clk/samsung: add support for pll2550xx
>>>> adec437 clk/samsung: add support for pll2650xx
>>>
>>> Right, these 7 patches would constitute a small PR. Was there a mistake
>>> when generating this pull request?
>>
>> The problem with this pull request is that it contains patches that
>> require quite a lot of dependencies that have been already applied into
>> Samsung SoC tree. I'm not sure how else such situation could be handled,
>> other than pulling respective commits into my tree as well.
>
> There are already a fair number of clk patches going through the samsung
> tree. So in the name of consistency for this upcoming merge window it
> might be best to take these patches through there as well. Let me know
> if that creates any undo burden on you. Otherwise please add:
>
> Acked-by: Mike Turquette <mturquette@linaro.org>

 From my perspective, as long as the patches flow upstream, it's one and 
the same. I wonder whether ARM SoC tree is still open for merges, 
though. Arnd, Olof?

Best regards,
Tomasz