From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: gabriel.fernandez@st.com (Gabriel Fernandez)
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2016 10:34:38 +0200
Subject: [PATCH v2 0/6] STM32F4 Add RTC & QSPI clocks
In-Reply-To: <20161018235108.GP8871@codeaurora.org>
References: <1476436699-21879-1-git-send-email-gabriel.fernandez@st.com>
 <20161018235108.GP8871@codeaurora.org>
Message-ID: <d878b846-556d-180b-8ebf-2d06646efb58@st.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

Hi Stephen,


On 10/19/2016 01:51 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> On 10/14, gabriel.fernandez at st.com wrote:
>> Gabriel Fernandez (6):
>>    clk: stm32f4: Add LSI & LSE clocks
>>    ARM: dts: stm32f429: add LSI and LSE clocks
>>    arm: stmf32: Enable SYSCON
>>    clk: stm32f4: Add RTC clock
>>    clk: stm32f469: Add QSPI clock
>>    ARM: dts: stm32f429: Add QSPI clock
> Can the clk patches be picked without causing problems for
> existing dt changes? Do you want an ack from clk maintainers
> instead of us picking the clk patches up? The series has
> intermingled clk and dts changes so I'm confused.
>

Thanks for reviewing.

Normally DT patches will be taken by STM32 maintainer, but yes there is 
a dependency between patch 1 & 2, so if you push the patch 1 into 
clk-next tree you have to take also patch 2.

You have to be synchronized with Alexandre Torgue.

Best Regards

Gabriel