From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tony Lindgren Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] pwms: pwm-ti*: Remove support for local clock gating Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2016 14:54:13 -0800 Message-ID: <20160302225413.GF4469@atomide.com> References: <1456439796-28546-1-git-send-email-fcooper@ti.com> <1456439796-28546-2-git-send-email-fcooper@ti.com> <20160229220444.GQ13417@atomide.com> <56D4C69D.1090100@ti.com> <20160229225536.GR13417@atomide.com> <56D4D032.7040801@ti.com> <20160229232011.GU13417@atomide.com> <56D741E6.3000708@ti.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <56D741E6.3000708@ti.com> Sender: linux-pwm-owner@vger.kernel.org To: "Franklin S Cooper Jr." Cc: paul@pwsan.com, t-kristo@ti.com, vigneshr@ti.com, linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-clk@vger.kernel.org, Thierry Reding List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org * Franklin S Cooper Jr. [160302 11:41]: > I know there are some comments regarding other patches in > this patchset but this patch is unrelated and can be pulled > in separately. Any objections to this or should I just > resubmit this patch by itself? No objections from me at least. If something needs to change at the driver level, it sounds like a different set of patches then. Regards, Tony