From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: linux@arm.linux.org.uk (Russell King - ARM Linux) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 13:42:58 +0100 Subject: announcing the clk-next branch In-Reply-To: <20120425123828.GC3852@pengutronix.de> References: <20120425123828.GC3852@pengutronix.de> Message-ID: <20120425124258.GY24211@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 02:38:28PM +0200, Sascha Hauer wrote: > On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 06:32:20PM -0700, Turquette, Mike wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > The clock patches that I have signed-off on and picked from the list > > are all rebased on top of 3.4-rc4. They can be found here: > > > > git://git.linaro.org/people/mturquette/linux.git clk-next > > Thanks Mike! > > > > > If the branch is missing anything that I have ACK'd then please let me know. > > You haven't acked it, but for i.MX I need two patches from Viresh I'd > like to base on: > > [PATCH V3 1/8] CLKDEV: Add helper routines to allocate and add clkdevs for given struct clk * > [PATCH V3 2/8] clk: add a fixed factor clock > > Also I need the patch implementing managed clk_get which currently sits > in Russells tree. Well, some of this stuff is already committed in my tree. There's total confusion at the moment over who's looking after clk API stuff - I'm listed as the official maintainer for linux/clk.h and clkdev, but Mike is clearly the guy doing all the common stuff. What would not be a good idea is to have the same patches committed independently into two different trees.