From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: g.liakhovetski@gmx.de (Guennadi Liakhovetski) Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 07:09:00 +0100 (CET) Subject: [PATCH 1/4] ARM: shmobile: sh73a0: fix Z and ZG clock hierarchy In-Reply-To: <20130226054319.GA25356@verge.net.au> References: <1361553474-27022-1-git-send-email-g.liakhovetski@gmx.de> <1361553474-27022-2-git-send-email-g.liakhovetski@gmx.de> <20130226042946.GB26820@verge.net.au> <20130226054319.GA25356@verge.net.au> Message-ID: To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Hi Simon On Tue, 26 Feb 2013, Simon Horman wrote: > On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 02:36:24PM +0900, Magnus Damm wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 1:29 PM, Simon Horman wrote: > > > On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 06:17:51PM +0100, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote: > > >> Z and ZG clocks on sh73a0 have pll0 as their parent, not pll1. > > > > > > Thanks I have applied this to the soc5 branch and thus queued it up for v3.10. > > > Please let me know if you would prefer me to push it as a fix for v3.9. > > > And in that vein, if you regard it as -stable material. > > > > Thanks. > > > > Perhaps other people disagree, but I recommend not being so trigger > > happy with -stable unless it will potentially give us some upside. > > AFAIK there is no in-tree consumer of this clock anyway, so involving > > -stable without further testing seems like a lot of hassle with no > > real benefit. > > If there is no in-tree consumer then it is not v3.9 or -stable material. Just to confirm, that I'm not aware of any current consumers of these clocks, so, no rush with stable. Thanks Guennadi --- Guennadi Liakhovetski, Ph.D. Freelance Open-Source Software Developer http://www.open-technology.de/