From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Scott Wood Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/8] clk: qoriq: Move chip-specific knowledge into driver Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2015 18:57:44 -0500 Message-ID: <1444435064.5185.16.camel@freescale.com> References: <1434682158-7243-1-git-send-email-scottwood@freescale.com> <20150811182535.31346.52965@quantum> <1443745589.5336.185.camel@freescale.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail-bn1bon0132.outbound.protection.outlook.com ([157.56.111.132]:38624 "EHLO na01-bn1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750753AbbJIX54 (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Oct 2015 19:57:56 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1443745589.5336.185.camel@freescale.com> Sender: linux-pm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org To: Michael Turquette Cc: Stephen Boyd , Tang Yuantian , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Liberman Igal-B31950 , Bucur Madalin-Cristian-B32716 , linux-clk@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2015-10-01 at 19:26 -0500, Scott Wood wrote: > [Resending to updated e-mail address] > > On Tue, 2015-08-11 at 11:25 -0700, Michael Turquette wrote: > > Hi Scott, > > > > Quoting Scott Wood (2015-06-18 19:49:10) > > > The existing device tree bindings are error-prone and inflexible. > > > Correct the mistake by moving the knowledge into the driver, which > > > has more flexibility in describing the quirks of each chip. This leaves > > > the device tree to its proper role of identifying a programming > > > interface > > > rather than describing its individual registers. > > > > Sorry for not responding to this one sooner. Fell through the cracks. > > > > All of the changes to drives/clk/clk-qoriq.c look great to me. I assume > > you need to keep all of these patches together and want to the take > > through the freescale tree? If so feel free to add, > > > > Acked-by: Michael Turquette > > Is the ack still valid for the v3 patchset? ping -Scott