Mike Turquette <mturquette@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > Quoting Haojian Zhuang (2014-01-14 21:59:40) >> >> On 01/15/2014 11:53 AM, Mike Turquette wrote: >> > Quoting zhangfei (2014-01-14 17:40:25) >> >> Dear Mike >> >> >> >> On 01/15/2014 04:17 AM, Mike Turquette wrote: >> >>> Quoting Zhangfei Gao (2014-01-13 01:14:28) >> >>>> Suggest by Arnd: abstract mmc tuning as clock behavior, >> >>>> also because different soc have different tuning method and registers. >> >>>> hi3620_mmc_clks is added to handle mmc clock specifically on hi3620. >> >>>> >> >>>> Signed-off-by: Zhangfei Gao <zhangfei.gao@xxxxxxxxxx> >> >>>> Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> >> >>>> Acked-by: Jaehoon Chung <jh80.chung@xxxxxxxxxxx> >> >>> Patch looks good to me with one exception. I do not have >> >>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/hisilicon/hisilicon.txt in the >> >>> clk-next branch. Is there a stable branch I can pull in as a dependency? >> >> Mach-hisi just have been uploaeded. >> >> Have tried next-20140114, the patch can be applied successfully. >> >> While v3.13-rc8 still can not. >> >> >> >> Is this fine? >> > Can you give me a link to the branch that introduces >> > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/hisilicon/hisilicon.txt? >> > >> > I guess the patch introducing it is going through arm-soc. Is this going >> > in for 3.14? If so then perhaps the clk tree and the arm-soc tree can >> > share a stable branch that introduces it. >> > >> > Regards, >> > Mike >> > >> Some patches are merged into arm-soc, and others are in clk tree. >> If sharing a stable branch between arm-soc and clk tree, it only means >> that we need to revert all commits that are in arm-soc and clk tree. >> I think it's too complex. > > I'm suggesting reverting any patches that are applied to arm-soc. I'm > only suggesting that there might be a common branch that both the clk > and arm-soc trees can depend on to fix this problem. This one is stable, and is where the binding is introduced: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/arm/arm-soc.git hisi/soc >> How about split the patch? The patch on document should enter in arm-soc. > > That is one approach. You might want to run it past the arm-soc folks > first to see if they will take in the binding definition for 3.14. We're not taking anything new for 3.14. Kevin -- 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
