From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Warren Subject: Re: [PATCH] i2c: tegra: use clk_disable_unprepare in place of clk_disable Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 09:55:02 -0600 Message-ID: <4FE889D6.4030500@wwwdotorg.org> References: <1340196960-3002-1-git-send-email-ldewangan@nvidia.com> <4FE1F9A0.6080200@wwwdotorg.org> <4FE1F9D6.6090802@wwwdotorg.org> <4FE83374.6090608@nvidia.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4FE83374.6090608-DDmLM1+adcrQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-i2c-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Laxman Dewangan Cc: "khali-PUYAD+kWke1g9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org" , "w.sang-bIcnvbaLZ9MEGnE8C9+IrQ@public.gmane.org" , Stephen Warren , "linux-i2c-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , "linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , Prashant Gaikwad List-Id: linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org On 06/25/2012 03:46 AM, Laxman Dewangan wrote: > Stephen, > > On Wednesday 20 June 2012 09:57 PM, Stephen Warren wrote: >> On 06/20/2012 10:26 AM, Stephen Warren wrote: >>> On 06/20/2012 06:56 AM, Laxman Dewangan wrote: >>>> Use clk_disable_unprepare() inplace of clk_disable(). >>>> This was missed as part of moving clock enable/disable to >>>> prepare/unprepare for using the common clock framework. >> ... >>> I see no reason not to take the second patch in the series through the >>> I2C tree though. >> Uggh. Ignore that paragraph - the other patch was sent separately not as >> a series. > > so are you taking care of this patch or do I need to send the patch > based on your tree in place of linux-next? Yes, this patch should be applied through the Tegra tree, since it will be a dependency of the common clock framework switchover there, which I hope to take place this kernel cycle. I did just attempt to apply this patch to the for-3.6/common-clk branch, but it doesn't apply:-( Could you please rebase and resend. Thanks.