On Tue, 21 Dec 2021 at 10:19, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 20/12/2021 15:55, Sam Protsenko wrote: > > On Mon, 20 Dec 2021 at 11:31, Krzysztof Kozlowski > > <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> On 19/12/2021 23:29, Sylwester Nawrocki wrote: > >>> On 17.12.2021 17:15, Sam Protsenko wrote: > >>>> System Register is used to configure system behavior, like USI protocol, > >>>> etc. SYSREG clocks should be provided to corresponding syscon nodes, to > >>>> make it possible to modify SYSREG registers. > >>>> > >>>> While at it, add also missing PMU and GPIO clocks, which looks necessary > >>>> and might be needed for corresponding Exynos850 features soon. > >>>> > >>>> Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski<krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >>>> Acked-by: Rob Herring<robh@xxxxxxxxxx> > >>>> Acked-by: Chanwoo Choi<cw00.choi@xxxxxxxxxxx> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Sam Protsenko<semen.protsenko@xxxxxxxxxx> > >>> > >>> Apologies for late reply, this patch is applied now. > >>> > >> > >> Sam, > >> > >> The clock is used in the DTSI, so since this was applied, there are only > >> two choices now: > >> 1. wait for next cycle with DTSI and DTS, > >> 2. Resubmit with replacing the newly added clocks in DTSI/DTS with > >> numbers and a TODO note. > >> > > > > But why? I thought because Sylwester applied my clock patches, those > > will get into v5.17, and so DTSI/DTS might rely on those clocks? If I > > get it wrong, please let me know why, and I'll go with item (2) you > > suggested. > > If I apply the DTSI+DTS, all my builds will start failing. The > linux-next (since Sylwester's tree is included) should build fine, but > my tree won't be buildable anymore. Then arm-soc pulls my tree and gets > said because it does not build. Later, Linus will be unhappy if he pulls > arm-soc (thus mine) before clock tree. > I see. Thanks for the explanation! > Other solution, instead of using raw numbers, is to copy-paste the clock > macros you use directly in DTSI and do not include the clock header. > This actually might be cleaner choice - changes will be limited to one > place in DTSI. > Will do so in v5. > Best regards, > Krzysztof
