From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Boyd Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Add MT8173 MMPLL change rate support Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2015 15:13:19 -0700 Message-ID: <20150714221319.GQ30412@codeaurora.org> References: <1436344666-25645-1-git-send-email-jamesjj.liao@mediatek.com> <559DC3EF.90401@codeaurora.org> <1436507086.3526.117.camel@mtksdaap41> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1436507086.3526.117.camel@mtksdaap41> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: James Liao Cc: Matthias Brugger , Mike Turquette , Heiko Stubner , srv_heupstream@mediatek.com, Daniel Kurtz , Ricky Liang , Rob Herring , Sascha Hauer , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On 07/10, James Liao wrote: > Hi Stephen, > > On Wed, 2015-07-08 at 17:44 -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote: > > On 07/08/2015 01:37 AM, James Liao wrote: > > > MT8173 MMPLL frequency settings are different from common PLLs. > > > It needs different post divider settings for some ranges of frequency. > > > This patch add support for MT8173 MMPLL frequency setting, includes: > > > > > > 1. Add div-rate table for PLLs. > > > 2. Increase the max ost divider setting from 3 (/8) to 4 (/16). > > > 3. Write postdiv and pcw settings at the same time. > > > > > > James Liao (2): > > > clk: mediatek: Fix PLL registers setting flow > > > clk: mediatek: Add MT8173 MMPLL change rate support > > > > > > > Are these fixing regressions in 4.2-rc1? I don't see any "Fixes:" tag so > > it's not clear and makes me want to defer these until v4.3. Furthermore, > > the subject starts with "Add" so it sounds like a new feature. > > This patchset is based on 4.1-rc1 but it had been tested on 4.2-rc1. > I'll send a new patch which based on 4.2-rc1. > > This patchset contains some general PLL fixes and MMPLL set rate > support. We can say the last one is also a fix because changing some > specific rate on MMPLL may fail in current implementation. > > I'm seriously confused. The files these patches touch were never in v4.1, so they can't be based on v4.1-rc1 unless you're saying they were on top of clk-next when it was based on 4.1-rc1? -- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project