From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: olof@lixom.net (Olof Johansson) Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2013 21:32:21 -0700 Subject: [PATCH v4 0/7] support Hisilicon SoC In-Reply-To: <20130616040823.7541.14694@quantum> References: <1370702843-27172-1-git-send-email-haojian.zhuang@linaro.org> <20130612200142.GD5162@quad.lixom.net> <201306131829.47348.heiko@sntech.de> <20130613195801.GA21765@quad.lixom.net> <20130616040823.7541.14694@quantum> Message-ID: To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 9:08 PM, Mike Turquette wrote: > Quoting Olof Johansson (2013-06-13 12:58:01) >> On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 06:29:47PM +0200, Heiko St?bner wrote: >> > Am Mittwoch, 12. Juni 2013, 22:01:42 schrieb Olof Johansson: >> > > On Sat, Jun 08, 2013 at 10:47:16PM +0800, Haojian Zhuang wrote: >> > > > Changelog: >> > > > v4: >> > > > 1. Add clk gate with HIWORD mask for Rockchip. >> > > > 2. Update comments and code of HIWORD flags for mux/divider. >> > > > 3. Append a mux without HIWORD mask in Hisilicon 3620. >> > > > 4. Fix the pinmux setting in Hi4511. >> > > > >> > > > v3: >> > > > 1. Use clk_register_mux_table(). >> > > > >> > > > v2: >> > > > 1. Reuse mux & divider driver. So append CLK_MUX_HIWORD_MASK & >> > > > CLK_DIVIDER_HIWORD_MASK for Hi3620 SoC. >> > > > 2. Fix system timer running too fast because wrong divider is choosen. >> > > > 3. Remove .init_irq in DT machine descriptor. >> > > >> > > Hi, >> > > >> > > I had some comments on the last two patches. I also haven't seen any acks >> > > from Mike on any of the clock changes, which would be needed before we can >> > > pick them up. He might want to merge them into his tree as well, if so >> > > we'll have to setup a shared branch. >> > >> > Also, if anything unexpected happens to the main hisilicon support, could you >> > or Mike pick up the HIWORD_MASK patches anyway (if they are acceptable), >> > because they're needed for the Rockchip stuff too. >> >> Ok, that definitely means a topic branch would be a good idea. Mike, can you >> collect these branches on a topic that we can just pull in as a dependency >> then, please? Assuming you're happy with them, of course. > > Do you mean s/branches/patches/ ? Yes, sorry -- please collect the patches on a stable topic branch (i.e. not part of all of clk-next) > I've pulled patches #1-#3 into clk-next, but I'd like a couple of rounds > through linux-next before I state that a given commit is stable. So > maybe early next week (it's still Saturday for me) I'll push out a > clk-for-3.11 branch that will have the hiword patches in them and the > sha1's will not change. Ok. We can pull in the larger clk-next branch if you are 100% confident that you won't have to rebase it. If you think there's even a minimal chance you will have to do so, it's better to do these on just a standalone branch that can still be stable commits. Either way works for us though. -Olof