I've unintentionally answered off-line, sorry, re-adding all Cc:'s. On Thursday 01 of December 2011 at 03:27:51, Tony Lindgren wrote: > * Janusz Krzysztofik <jkrzyszt@xxxxxxxxxxxx> [111130 17:40]: > > On Wednesday 30 of November 2011 at 23:32:42, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > > > > > Can you please split your series into two: Fix(es) for the -rc cycle, > > > then patches that can be left for the next merge window. > > > > From my point of view, all 5 are important fixes. Please decide > > yourself, having the following information provided: > > > > 1/5: inspired by in-line comments about running from sram requirement > > (works without this one for me), > > > > 2/5: without this one, system clock runs way too fast if dpll1 is > > reprogrammed to default rate, > > > > 3/5: without this one, all boards with bootloaders not setting rate > > correctly, like Amstrad Delta, will run at default rate, despite > > any .config selections, no matter if omap1_defconfig or custom, > > > > 2a/5: required by 3/5, > > > > 5/5: without this one, BogoMIPS is not updated after dpll1 reprogramme, > > breaking omap_keypad at least. > > > > and please let me know which I should resend as fixes and which not. > > How about 2 and 5 as fixes during the -rc, then the rest for the > merge window? That is assuming that those are enough for you to have > things mostly working. If you still ask me for my opinion: with patch 3/5 omitted, then not being able to run at any other frequency than 60 MHz instead of usual 150 since the board support was introduced first, isn't this a regression? Having a choice of upgrading to 3.2 and running my application on not very powerfull board at 60 MHz, or keep running 3.1 at 150, guess what I chose? If I were a distro kernel package maintainer, guess what I would chose? > It seems that we've had the issue of not actually changing the rate > for a while, right? This was not an issue before dpll1 reprogramming has been moved out from omap1_clk_init(), as an rc fix to another bug introduced in 3.2. Perhaps we should rather think of reverting a few commits which caused all these problems if fixing them all during rc cycle seems not possible? I haven't bisected them yet, rather concentrated on providing fixes, but I can still try to do it, starting back from the original issue (http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-omap/msg60052.html), if so decided. > If that's the case, I'd rather not start messing > with that during the -rc cycle. > > Regards, > > Tony I don't feel like a person who makes the final decision. Anyway, did you mean resending those 2/5 and 5/5 without any changes, only renumbered as 1/2 and 2/2? Thanks, Janusz -- 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
