From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Boyd Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/3] clk: Broadcom BCM63138 support Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2015 10:46:12 -0800 Message-ID: <20151120184612.GT32672@codeaurora.org> References: <1446168199-5959-1-git-send-email-f.fainelli@gmail.com> <564E70A4.8060001@gmail.com> <564E712C.50309@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <564E712C.50309@gmail.com> Sender: linux-clk-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Florian Fainelli Cc: linux-clk@vger.kernel.org, bcm-kernel-feedback-list@broadcom.com, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, jonmason@broadcom.com, mturquette@baylibre.com, linux@arm.linux.org.uk, sbranden@broadcom.com, rjui@broadcom.com List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On 11/19, Florian Fainelli wrote: > On 19/11/15 17:00, Florian Fainelli wrote: > > On 29/10/15 18:23, Florian Fainelli wrote: > >> This patch series adds support for the Broadcom BCM63138 DSL SoCs > >> clocking framework. > >> > >> Since the HW is identical to the one found in Broadcom iProc SoCs, but the > >> integration is different (obviously), there is still a new compatible string > >> introduced just in case we happen to find issues in the future. > >> > >> Stephen, could you stage the two patches in a clk-bcm63xx branch that I could > >> later utilize while doing the arm-soc DT pull request? > > > > Stephen, can you queue the first two patches in a topic branch for me to > > merge as part of the commit adding the DTS changes? > > Well, now that I look back at the changes, you can actually merge the > two patches in clk-next, and the DTS changes can come in before or > after, it does not really matter, this would not cause breakage or > anything. Sorry for the noise. Really? I thought if the clk patches aren't there then the dts change would cause some clocks to be orphaned. If that's ok with you it's ok with me. -- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project