From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 10:35:54 -0700 From: Stephen Boyd To: Heiko =?iso-8859-1?Q?St=FCbner?= Cc: Ulf Hansson , Michael Turquette , "tgih.jun@samsung.com" , Jaehoon Chung , linux-mmc , linux-clk@vger.kernel.org, "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "open list:ARM/Rockchip SoC..." , Doug Anderson , Alexandru Stan Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/8] mmc: core: Add mmc_regulator_set_vqmmc() Message-ID: <20151001173554.GB19319@codeaurora.org> References: <1443622064-14362-1-git-send-email-heiko@sntech.de> <17200614.QxCe8zAb7I@diego> <2695161.Z1IhqPE0bd@diego> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 In-Reply-To: <2695161.Z1IhqPE0bd@diego> List-ID: On 10/01, Heiko Stübner wrote: > Am Donnerstag, 1. Oktober 2015, 11:54:24 schrieb Ulf Hansson: > > On 30 September 2015 at 16:55, Heiko Stübner wrote: > > > Am Mittwoch, 30. September 2015, 16:42:05 schrieb Ulf Hansson: > > >> On 30 September 2015 at 16:07, Heiko Stuebner wrote: > > > The clock changes of course only touch internals of the phase-clocks, so > > > should have no problem going through another tree. > > > > What happens if I take mmc and dt changes, wouldn't I need the clock > > patches as well? > > The API stays of course the same, only the degree to settings translation gets > optimized, so I guess in the worst case you would get no good phase and thus > fall back to non-highspeed modes - but the system would stay running. > > But of course, if the clock maintainers could Ack the two clock patches and > everything would stay together that would work even better :-) > If Ulf doesn't want to take them we can apply them to clk tree. Otherwise, you can have my acked-by on the clk patches. -- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project