* Re: [PATCH 00/17] sh and mach-shmobile struct sh_clk_ops rename
2012-02-29 13:16 [PATCH 00/17] sh and mach-shmobile struct sh_clk_ops rename Magnus Damm
@ 2012-03-05 20:56 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2012-03-06 3:32 ` Paul Mundt
` (3 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Rafael J. Wysocki @ 2012-03-05 20:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-sh
Hi,
On Wednesday, February 29, 2012, Magnus Damm wrote:
> sh and mach-shmobile struct sh_clk_ops rename
>
> [PATCH 01/17] sh: introduce sh_clk_ops in parallel with clk_ops
> [PATCH 02/17] sh: convert cpg code to sh_clk_ops
> [PATCH 03/17] ARM: mach-shmobile: sh7367 sh_clk_ops rename
> [PATCH 04/17] ARM: mach-shmobile: sh7377 sh_clk_ops rename
> [PATCH 05/17] ARM: mach-shmobile: sh7372 sh_clk_ops rename
> [PATCH 06/17] ARM: mach-shmobile: sh73a0 sh_clk_ops rename
> [PATCH 07/17] ARM: mach-shmobile: r8a7740 sh_clk_ops rename
> [PATCH 08/17] ARM: mach-shmobile: r8a7779 sh_clk_ops rename
> [PATCH 09/17] sh: sh header sh_clk_ops rename
> [PATCH 10/17] sh: sh2 sh_clk_ops rename
> [PATCH 11/17] sh: sh2a sh_clk_ops rename
> [PATCH 12/17] sh: sh3 sh_clk_ops rename
> [PATCH 13/17] sh: sh4 sh_clk_ops rename
> [PATCH 14/17] sh: sh4a sh_clk_ops rename
> [PATCH 15/17] sh: sh5 sh_clk_ops rename
> [PATCH 16/17] sh: board sh_clk_ops rename
> [PATCH 17/17] sh: remove clk_ops
>
> This patch series renames struct clk_ops to struct sh_clk_ops across
> arch/sh, arch/arm/mach-shmobile and drivers/sh. The reason for this
> is to avoid name space collision with the common struct clk patches.
>
> Merge order wise across the different trees, [PATCH 01/17] needs to be
> first and [PATCH 17/17] last. In between any order is ok.
>
> All SoCs with ARM, sh2, sh3, sh4 and sh4a are known to compile.
> sh2a and sh5 are not compiled but survive basic grep testing.
>
> Signed-off-by: Magnus Damm <damm@opensource.se>
Well, this is a hard one, because it has a potential to create many
dependencies and I think some other patchsets already posted depend on it
right?
I'd handle that by creating a separate branch, based on the Linus' current,
that will contain all of the patches in the $subject series and may be
merged into other branches by me or Paul as needed.
What do you think?
Rafael
> ---
>
> arch/arm/mach-shmobile/clock-r8a7740.c | 6 +++---
> arch/arm/mach-shmobile/clock-r8a7779.c | 2 +-
> arch/arm/mach-shmobile/clock-sh7367.c | 6 +++---
> arch/arm/mach-shmobile/clock-sh7372.c | 8 ++++----
> arch/arm/mach-shmobile/clock-sh7377.c | 6 +++---
> arch/arm/mach-shmobile/clock-sh73a0.c | 12 ++++++------
> arch/sh/boards/mach-highlander/setup.c | 2 +-
> arch/sh/boards/mach-sdk7786/setup.c | 2 +-
> arch/sh/include/asm/clock.h | 2 +-
> arch/sh/kernel/cpu/sh2/clock-sh7619.c | 12 ++++++------
> arch/sh/kernel/cpu/sh2a/clock-sh7201.c | 12 ++++++------
> arch/sh/kernel/cpu/sh2a/clock-sh7203.c | 12 ++++++------
> arch/sh/kernel/cpu/sh2a/clock-sh7206.c | 12 ++++++------
> arch/sh/kernel/cpu/sh3/clock-sh3.c | 12 ++++++------
> arch/sh/kernel/cpu/sh3/clock-sh7705.c | 12 ++++++------
> arch/sh/kernel/cpu/sh3/clock-sh7706.c | 12 ++++++------
> arch/sh/kernel/cpu/sh3/clock-sh7709.c | 12 ++++++------
> arch/sh/kernel/cpu/sh3/clock-sh7710.c | 12 ++++++------
> arch/sh/kernel/cpu/sh3/clock-sh7712.c | 10 +++++-----
> arch/sh/kernel/cpu/sh4/clock-sh4-202.c | 6 +++---
> arch/sh/kernel/cpu/sh4/clock-sh4.c | 12 ++++++------
> arch/sh/kernel/cpu/sh4a/clock-sh7343.c | 4 ++--
> arch/sh/kernel/cpu/sh4a/clock-sh7366.c | 4 ++--
> arch/sh/kernel/cpu/sh4a/clock-sh7722.c | 4 ++--
> arch/sh/kernel/cpu/sh4a/clock-sh7723.c | 4 ++--
> arch/sh/kernel/cpu/sh4a/clock-sh7724.c | 6 +++---
> arch/sh/kernel/cpu/sh4a/clock-sh7757.c | 2 +-
> arch/sh/kernel/cpu/sh4a/clock-sh7763.c | 14 +++++++-------
> arch/sh/kernel/cpu/sh4a/clock-sh7770.c | 12 ++++++------
> arch/sh/kernel/cpu/sh4a/clock-sh7780.c | 14 +++++++-------
> arch/sh/kernel/cpu/sh4a/clock-sh7785.c | 2 +-
> arch/sh/kernel/cpu/sh4a/clock-sh7786.c | 2 +-
> arch/sh/kernel/cpu/sh4a/clock-shx3.c | 2 +-
> arch/sh/kernel/cpu/sh5/clock-sh5.c | 12 ++++++------
> drivers/sh/clk/cpg.c | 16 ++++++++--------
> include/linux/sh_clk.h | 7 ++++---
> 36 files changed, 144 insertions(+), 143 deletions(-)
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-sh" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH 00/17] sh and mach-shmobile struct sh_clk_ops rename
2012-02-29 13:16 [PATCH 00/17] sh and mach-shmobile struct sh_clk_ops rename Magnus Damm
2012-03-05 20:56 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
@ 2012-03-06 3:32 ` Paul Mundt
2012-03-06 22:24 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
` (2 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Paul Mundt @ 2012-03-06 3:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-sh
On Mon, Mar 05, 2012 at 09:56:34PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Wednesday, February 29, 2012, Magnus Damm wrote:
> > sh and mach-shmobile struct sh_clk_ops rename
>
> Well, this is a hard one, because it has a potential to create many
> dependencies and I think some other patchsets already posted depend on it
> right?
>
> I'd handle that by creating a separate branch, based on the Linus' current,
> that will contain all of the patches in the $subject series and may be
> merged into other branches by me or Paul as needed.
>
> What do you think?
>
There are a few ways to do this I suppose. A common topic branch that we
can pull in to either the SH or ARM side makes sense. We can do the
entire series in one topic branch that gets merged twice and we just make
sure that no rebasing takes place, or we can do patches 1-2 on a common
branch, then 3-8 on an rmobile branch based on the common on, 9-16 on an
sh one, and then leave 17 for the end of the merge window.
Ultimately it depends on how much more work there is going to be done
built on top of this. The sh changes are minimal, so I'm not too worried
about merge conflicts even if we just keep all of these batched together.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH 00/17] sh and mach-shmobile struct sh_clk_ops rename
2012-02-29 13:16 [PATCH 00/17] sh and mach-shmobile struct sh_clk_ops rename Magnus Damm
2012-03-05 20:56 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2012-03-06 3:32 ` Paul Mundt
@ 2012-03-06 22:24 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2012-03-07 2:32 ` Paul Mundt
2012-03-07 21:51 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Rafael J. Wysocki @ 2012-03-06 22:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-sh
On Tuesday, March 06, 2012, Paul Mundt wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 05, 2012 at 09:56:34PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Wednesday, February 29, 2012, Magnus Damm wrote:
> > > sh and mach-shmobile struct sh_clk_ops rename
> >
> > Well, this is a hard one, because it has a potential to create many
> > dependencies and I think some other patchsets already posted depend on it
> > right?
> >
> > I'd handle that by creating a separate branch, based on the Linus' current,
> > that will contain all of the patches in the $subject series and may be
> > merged into other branches by me or Paul as needed.
> >
> > What do you think?
> >
> There are a few ways to do this I suppose. A common topic branch that we
> can pull in to either the SH or ARM side makes sense. We can do the
> entire series in one topic branch that gets merged twice and we just make
> sure that no rebasing takes place, or we can do patches 1-2 on a common
> branch, then 3-8 on an rmobile branch based on the common on, 9-16 on an
> sh one, and then leave 17 for the end of the merge window.
>
> Ultimately it depends on how much more work there is going to be done
> built on top of this. The sh changes are minimal, so I'm not too worried
> about merge conflicts even if we just keep all of these batched together.
OK, so would you mind if I created a clk_ops-rename branch in the renesas
tree at git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rafael/renesas.git
and put the whole $subject series into it?
Rafael
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 00/17] sh and mach-shmobile struct sh_clk_ops rename
2012-02-29 13:16 [PATCH 00/17] sh and mach-shmobile struct sh_clk_ops rename Magnus Damm
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2012-03-06 22:24 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
@ 2012-03-07 2:32 ` Paul Mundt
2012-03-07 21:51 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Paul Mundt @ 2012-03-07 2:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-sh
On Tue, Mar 06, 2012 at 11:24:20PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Tuesday, March 06, 2012, Paul Mundt wrote:
> > There are a few ways to do this I suppose. A common topic branch that we
> > can pull in to either the SH or ARM side makes sense. We can do the
> > entire series in one topic branch that gets merged twice and we just make
> > sure that no rebasing takes place, or we can do patches 1-2 on a common
> > branch, then 3-8 on an rmobile branch based on the common on, 9-16 on an
> > sh one, and then leave 17 for the end of the merge window.
> >
> > Ultimately it depends on how much more work there is going to be done
> > built on top of this. The sh changes are minimal, so I'm not too worried
> > about merge conflicts even if we just keep all of these batched together.
>
> OK, so would you mind if I created a clk_ops-rename branch in the renesas
> tree at git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rafael/renesas.git
> and put the whole $subject series into it?
>
Sounds fine to me.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH 00/17] sh and mach-shmobile struct sh_clk_ops rename
2012-02-29 13:16 [PATCH 00/17] sh and mach-shmobile struct sh_clk_ops rename Magnus Damm
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2012-03-07 2:32 ` Paul Mundt
@ 2012-03-07 21:51 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Rafael J. Wysocki @ 2012-03-07 21:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-sh
On Wednesday, March 07, 2012, Paul Mundt wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 06, 2012 at 11:24:20PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Tuesday, March 06, 2012, Paul Mundt wrote:
> > > There are a few ways to do this I suppose. A common topic branch that we
> > > can pull in to either the SH or ARM side makes sense. We can do the
> > > entire series in one topic branch that gets merged twice and we just make
> > > sure that no rebasing takes place, or we can do patches 1-2 on a common
> > > branch, then 3-8 on an rmobile branch based on the common on, 9-16 on an
> > > sh one, and then leave 17 for the end of the merge window.
> > >
> > > Ultimately it depends on how much more work there is going to be done
> > > built on top of this. The sh changes are minimal, so I'm not too worried
> > > about merge conflicts even if we just keep all of these batched together.
> >
> > OK, so would you mind if I created a clk_ops-rename branch in the renesas
> > tree at git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rafael/renesas.git
> > and put the whole $subject series into it?
> >
> Sounds fine to me.
Done.
Thanks,
Rafael
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread