Hi Simon, On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 3:54 PM, Simon Horman <horms@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Oct 09, 2013 at 01:59:46PM +0900, Magnus Damm wrote: >> Hi Simon, >> >> On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 12:40 PM, Simon Horman <horms@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 02:34:03PM +0900, takasi-y@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: >> >> Use common clock framework version of clock >> >> drivers/clk/shmobile/clk-emev2.c >> >> instead of sh-clkfwk version >> >> arch/arm/mach-shmobile/clock-emev2.c >> >> when it is configured as a part of multi-platform. >> >> >> >> Signed-off-by: Takashi Yoshii <takasi-y@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> > >> > Thanks. >> > >> > I plan to add this patch to a new topic branch, >> > topic/emev2-common-clock, in the renesas tree and >> > queue it up from there for inclusion in mainline >> > if/when the first patch of this series is accepted >> > by Mike Turquette. >> >> Thanks for picking up patches, Simon. >> >> I think you can simply merge this patch after the following series: >> >> [PATCH 00/05] ARM: shmobile: KZM9D Multiplatform update > > This is already queued up. Yes, I know, thanks for that. I tried to explain the dependency in the 00/00 cover letter but I will try to be more clear next time! >> There are no build time dependencies on patch 1 and 2 so this patch >> can be merged independently. Regarding run-time operation, the >> multiplatform series above makes KZM9D DT reference only build for >> multiplatform, and in such case CCF is required. >> >> So if you want to keep KZM9D DT reference working until Mike Turquette >> accepts the CCF bits, then I recommend you to wait with "[PATCH 00/05] >> ARM: shmobile: KZM9D Multiplatform update" until all EMEV2 CCF bits >> have been merged. >> >> Another way is to merge "[PATCH 00/05] ARM: shmobile: KZM9D >> Multiplatform update" before the EMEV2 CCF bits, but if so you may as >> well merge this patch as well IMO. This >> multiplatform-update-series-merge-before-CCF plan will result in >> untestable KZM9D DT reference until EMEV2 CCF is merged. Either way is >> fine with me. > > I am mainly concerned that the bindings may change before > they are finally merged. And I thought it would be nice to avoid > having to fix up the usage of the bindings if they change. Sure, but the code in this patch looks like it simply starts DT CCF probing regardless of what the bindings look like. So I don't think you will have to worry about actual bindings detail. > But I'm happy to just queue-up patches 2 and 3 of this series > now if you prefer. Well, I meant patch 3 only. Patch 1 and 2 are tied together by dependencies. =) / magnus -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
