On 11/22/20 12:34, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 05:36:35PM +0100, Sylwester Nawrocki wrote: >> On 11/19/20 17:45, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>> So far all Exynos, S3C64xx and S5Pv210 clock units were selected by >>> respective SOC/ARCH Kconfig option. On a kernel built for selected >>> SoCs, this allowed to build only limited set of matching clock drivers. >>> However compile testing was not possible in such case as Makefile object >>> depent on SOC/ARCH option. >> >> "objects depend" or "object depends" ? > > "object depends" > >>> Add separate Kconfig options for each of them to be able to compile >>> test. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski<krzk@xxxxxxxxxx> >> >> The patch look good to me, thanks. >> Acked-by: Sylwester Nawrocki <s.nawrocki@xxxxxxxxxxx> >> >> I guess it's best now to merge it through your tree as it depends on >> patches already sent to arm-soc? Next time it might be better to use >> immutable branches right away to keep the clk changes in the clk >> maintainer's tree. > > At that time I had only one clk patch so I did not put it on separate > branch. > > Anyway, this does not depend on the clkout patches and only minor patch > adjustement is needed. Cherry-pick can solve it (you would need to apply > on next/master and then cherry pick) or I can resend you one rebased on > linus/master. > > There should be no conflicts when merging later into next or linus. > > I propose you should take it via clk tree. Indeed, the conflict is minimal, I should have checked with git cherry-pick once I found a branch where the patch applied cleanly. I have corrected the typo an applied, thank you! -- Regards, Sylwester
