Re: RE: [PATCH v2 0/8] Common Clock Framework support for Samsung S3C64xx

[Mike Turquette <mturquette@linaro.org>]

Quoting Kukjin Kim (2013-08-17 03:30:11)
> Tomasz Figa wrote:
> 
> [...]
> 
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Basically, this series looks good to me, but I'm not sure how this
> > > > > > should be handled because of dependency with PWM cleanup and clk
> > > > > > stuff
> > > > > > in clk tree now...
> > > > >
> > > > > Patches 1-3 can go into the clk tree. 4-6 should go through their
> > > > > respective trees.
> > > >
> > > > It looks like version 2 of patch 2/8 has been applied by mistake,
> > > > breaking compilation (and operation) of the clock driver added in
> > > > patch 3/8.
> > > Ugh. My mistake.
> > 
> > Happens. Thanks for fast response.
> > 
> Sorry for late ;-)
> 
> > > > Could you please fix this up? Thanks in advance.
> > >
> > > This is a little tricky since I published the clk-next-s3c64xx branch as
> > > a stable branch for Samsung which I think has been merged to the
> > > Samsung tree already.
> > 
> > Right, this somewhat limits our options. Although I'm not really sure
> > whether Kukjin already has pushed it to his public tree.
> > 
> Yeah, I already did sort out in my local but not public tree because of some
> problem.
> 
> > > So what are the options?
> > >
> > > One option is to create a fixup patch that just manages the delta
> > > between V2 and V3. I can then add this to the top of clk-next-s3c64xx
> > > and re-merge it into clk-next. Then the Samsung tree will need to
> > > re-merge that dependency branch.
> > 
> > Well, I can make a "convert PLL65xx to new registration method" patch,
> > that would be basically the delta. If this could be merged before patch
> > 7/8, no regression would be introduced.
> > 
> > > Do you have a better idea?
> > 
> > Not really. Maybe let's ask Kukjin whether he has already merged it to his
> > tree. Kukjin, have you?
> > 
> OK, if new branch is ready, I will replace with that or if re-merge is
> required, I will. Either way, I'm fine and can handle. Mike, let me know
> your choice :-)

Since I have already published it let's just go with the delta patch.  I
can create another stable branch named clk-next-s3c64xx-delta that just
has this patch on top of clk-next-s3c64xx OR I can apply it on top of
the existing clk-next-s3c64xx and re-merge it.

I'm trying to think on whether there are any weird git corner cases with
re-merging clk-next-s3c64xx. Let me know if re-merging is somehow unsafe
(makes history weird, or whatever).

Let me know what option is better for you. I'll publish as soon as I get
the delta patch. Apologies again for creating some extra work!

Thanks,
Mike

> 
> Thanks,
> Kukjin