From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Boyd Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 4/5] clk: hi6220: Clock driver support for Hisilicon hi6220 SoC Date: Tue, 19 May 2015 13:35:07 -0700 Message-ID: <555B9E7B.9000809@codeaurora.org> References: <1430827599-11560-1-git-send-email-bintian.wang@huawei.com> <1430827599-11560-5-git-send-email-bintian.wang@huawei.com> <20150515002527.GD31753@codeaurora.org> <5555A37B.1090105@huawei.com> <20150515193041.GO31753@codeaurora.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Brent Wang Cc: Bintian , linux-arm-kernel , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , Rob Herring , Pawel Moll , Mark Rutland , Ian Campbell , Kumar Gala , Kevin Hilman , Mike Turquette , Rob Herring , Zhangfei Gao , Haojian Zhuang , Xu Wei , Jaehoon Chung , Olof Johansson , Haifeng Yan , "xuejiancheng@huawei.com" , sledge. List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On 05/15/15 19:54, Brent Wang wrote: > >>> How about just send this patch for review not the whole patch set in >>> next version? >>> >> Yes a single patch is fine. I take it you want the patch to go >> through arm-soc with some Ack from us? > Yes, exactly. > The dts file includes the clock head file, this patch goes through > arm-soc is a good choice. One way to avoid that problem is to split the clock header file into its own patch and then duplicate that patch in two trees, one that goes through arm-soc and one that goes through clk. -- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project