Tony Lindgren <tony@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > * Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> [090312 10:03]: >> On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 09:54:41AM -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote: >> > If you can share your opinions on the two register access approaches I >> > described, I will work on coordinating development in that direction. >> >> If I had a path forwards, then I would say so. At the moment, I have >> a vague idea about what I'd like to see, but it isn't in a workable >> state at the present time. >> >> I need to put further thought and time into coming up with a solution. >> For the time being, I am not going to apply the outstanding patches to >> put in place a solution which is totally confused about iomem and u32 >> types with lots of casts to make it work. Even one which passes u32 >> types to the IO accessors (which don't produce a warning but shouldn't >> be allowed in any case.) > > Well let's get the current omap clock patches in omap-clks3 merged. > It is already way closer to what we need than the current mainline code. > > Paul, maybe you can post that series to linux-omap for final review > and testing because of the mail/OOM issues Russell is having? I will post this series to linux-omap for final review. I don't think there are any major objections that should prevent this from going into this merge window. > Then we'll come up with a proper solution for the remaining patches > after this merge window. Agreed, this PRCM issue does not need to be resolved for this merge window. Kevin -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
