On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 11:38:37AM -0800, Stephen Boyd wrote: > Quoting Russell King - ARM Linux admin (2019-01-31 07:21:47) > > On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 03:24:52PM +0200, Matti Vaittinen wrote: > > > Hello All, > > > > > > On Fri, Dec 07, 2018 at 01:09:00PM +0200, Matti Vaittinen wrote: > > > > Series adds managed clkdev lookup interfaces and cleans few drivers > > > > > > > > Few clk drivers appear to be leaking clkdev lookup registrations at > > > > driver remove. The patch series adds devm versions of lookup > > > > registrations and cleans up few drivers. Driver clean-up patches have > > > > not been tested as I lack the HW. All testing and comments if > > > > driver/device removal is even possible for changed drivers is highly > > > > appreciated. If removal is not possible I will gladly drop the patches > > > > from series - although leaking lookups may serve as bad example for new > > > > developers =) > > > > > > > > Changed drivers are: > > > > clk-max77686 and clk-st > > > > > > > > Please note that the patch #2 requires this change to work correctly: > > > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/clk/linux.git/commit/?h=clk-next&id=05502bf9eb7a7297f5fa6f1d17b169b3d5b53570 > > > > > > I guess the dependency mentioned abowe is already in (most) of the > > > trees. (I can't say for sure as I don't know what is the correct tree > > > for clkdev - is it linux-arm.git as Russel is maintaining clkdev? > > > > Yes, I'm supposed to be maintaining clkdev, but I'm busy with other > > stuff (such as reorganising my network, helping people with SFP issues, > > I'm supposed to be replying to Arend over a brcmfmac issue that has been > > on-going since Christmas which I haven't yet been able to doing the next > > test...) > > > > > If yes, then the commit 05502bf9eb7a7297f5fa6f1d17b169b3d5b53570 > > > "clk: of-provider: look at parent if registered device has no > > > provider info" seems to be sitting in maser branch). > > > > It's there because it's part of the mainline kernel and has been > > since v5.0-rc1. So, if you depend on that commit, basing off > > v5.0-rc1 is probably sane, unless there's something else that > > conflicts. > > > > I can pick up the patches in the clk tree. Clk drivers will be the users > so it's probably simplest to merge the clkdev patch in clk tree and then > consumers can be updated at the same time in a patch stack on top of > that. This sounds good to me if it is Ok to Russel. Please just let me know if you want me to rebase (to clk-next?) and resend the series. > Otherwise, if I can get a stable branch/tag to pile the clk driver > patches on I can apply them that way and then the clkdev patch can go > via Russell. I can for sure go with this approach as well if it has some advantages to you. Again, please just let me know if I should resend series and if I should use something else but clk-next as a base. Br, Matti Vaittinen -- Matti Vaittinen, Linux device drivers ROHM Semiconductors, Finland SWDC Kiviharjunlenkki 1E 90220 OULU FINLAND ~~~ "I don't think so," said Rene Descartes. Just then, he vanished ~~~
