Hi all, On 2021-09-18 16:40:38, Marijn Suijten wrote: > On 2021-09-14 14:44:01, Stephen Boyd wrote: > > Quoting Marijn Suijten (2021-09-11 06:19:19) > > > All DSI PHY/PLL drivers were referencing their VCO parent clock by a > > > global name, most of which don't exist or have been renamed. These > > > clock drivers seem to function fine without that except the 14nm driver > > > for sdm6xx [1]. > > > > > > At the same time all DTs provide a "ref" clock as per the requirements > > > of dsi-phy-common.yaml, but the clock is never used. This patchset puts > > > that clock to use without relying on a global clock name, so that all > > > dependencies are explicitly defined in DT (the firmware) in the end. > > > > I can take this through clk tree if it helps avoid conflicts. There are > > some other patches to sdm660.c in the clk tree already. > > Might be useful to maintain proper ordering of these dependent patches > but it's up to Dmitry and Rob to decide, whom I'm sending this mail > directly to so that they can chime in. Dependent patch [3] landed in 5.15 and [2] made it into 5.16 rc's - is it time to pick this series up and if so through what tree? Repeating the links from patch 1/2: [2]: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/20210830175739.143401-1-marijn.suijten@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ [3]: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/20210829203027.276143-2-marijn.suijten@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ Thanks! - marijn
