From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754248AbbLTJKN (ORCPT ); Sun, 20 Dec 2015 04:10:13 -0500 Received: from comal.ext.ti.com ([198.47.26.152]:34944 "EHLO comal.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754212AbbLTJKD (ORCPT ); Sun, 20 Dec 2015 04:10:03 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 7/8] clk: rockchip: fix usbphy-related clocks To: =?UTF-8?Q?Heiko_St=c3=bcbner?= , References: <1447968149-10979-1-git-send-email-heiko@sntech.de> <1447968149-10979-8-git-send-email-heiko@sntech.de> <566FF0F0.6080803@ti.com> <80597401.Y78Rj8FshV@diego> CC: , , , , , , , From: Kishon Vijay Abraham I Message-ID: <5676703B.90300@ti.com> Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2015 14:39:15 +0530 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <80597401.Y78Rj8FshV@diego> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, On Saturday 19 December 2015 10:51 PM, Heiko Stübner wrote: > Hi Kishon, > > Am Dienstag, 15. Dezember 2015, 16:22:32 schrieb Kishon Vijay Abraham I: >> On Friday 20 November 2015 02:52 AM, Heiko Stuebner wrote: >>> The otgphy clocks really only drive the phy blocks. These in turn >>> contain plls that then generate the 480m clocks the clock controller >>> uses to supply some other clocks like uart0, gpu or the video-codec. >>> >>> So fix this structure to actually respect that hirarchy and removed >>> that usb480m fixed-rate clock working as a placeholder till now, as >>> this wouldn't even work if the supplying phy gets turned off while >>> its pll-output gets used elsewhere. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Heiko Stuebner >>> Reviewed-by: Douglas Anderson >> >> I saw you've given your Acked-by in a previous version of this patch. >> Do you want me to take this in linux-phy tree? > > from my POV, this series should probably go through your tree in one go, as > this patch depends on the newly exposed clocks from the previous patch. So to > keep bisectability, it should most likely stay together. I agree. But I can't take another subsystem patch without getting a clear nod from the maintainer. I'll wait till tomorrow for Turquette to give his Acked-by. Thanks Kishon