On Wednesday 09 July 2014 11:17 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 9 July 2014 20:23, Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@xxxxxx> wrote: >> I scanned this patch and subsequent patches from the series. Since you are >> modifying the interfaces and bindings, I just think its better if we can >> address the cases where separate clock lines will be used by CPUs. >> >> Surely don't want to increase your work neither want hold the progress >> of the series but if you look at the changes to the interfaces, they >> give you a feeling of incompleteness. > > Lets talk in the other thread you raised, 2/14 .. > >>> Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> --- >> Would you able to give some idea about what will it take to address that one >> remainder case as well as part of this series. > > Which one? This: > >> We still *don't* support platforms with separate clock/voltage lines for CPUs. >> This would be done in a separate patch. > > Its already fixed as part of this series. > I suggest you word the commit in that case. Saying subsequent patch adds support for the remainder case. Let me scan the remainder patches again to see how its done. Regards, Santosh -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
