From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd.bergmann@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] clk: Use a separate struct for holding init data.
Date: Wed, 2 May 2012 13:32:44 +0000
Message-ID: <201205021332.44699.arnd.bergmann@linaro.org>
References: <4d67387a86d99cbb4e2acf68d3588b1c.squirrel@www.codeaurora.org> <20120501181922.GD4089@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <20120502015650.GE17311@gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <linux-arm-msm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.171]:49679 "EHLO
	moutng.kundenserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1753420Ab2EBNdY (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 2 May 2012 09:33:24 -0400
In-Reply-To: <20120502015650.GE17311@gmail.com>
Sender: linux-arm-msm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org
To: Mike Turquette <mturquette@ti.com>
Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>, Saravana Kannan <skannan@codeaurora.org>, Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@linaro.org>, Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>, Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>, Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>, h@pengutronix.de, Jamie Iles <jamie@jamieiles.com>, Jeremy Kerr <jeremy.kerr@canonical.com>, Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@gmail.com>, Deepak Saxena <dsaxena@linaro.org>, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, Rob Herring <rob.herring@calxeda.com>, Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Richard Zhao <richard.zhao@linaro.org>, Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@freescale.com>, Paul Walmsley <paul@pwsan.com>, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@stericsson.com>, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Amit Kucheria <amit.kucheria@linaro.org>

On Wednesday 02 May 2012, Mike Turquette wrote:
> I was happy to push my changes to Linus directly (as discussed in
> previous mails) but I'm starting to think that maybe having Arnd absorb
> the clk-next branch as part of arm-soc would be the fastest way to
> assist platforms that are porting over.
> 
> Do the platform folks agree?  Is this suggestion sane?

I guess that makes sense while there are still nontrivial
interdependencies between work going the clk-next branch and into
arm-soc.

	Arnd

From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: arnd.bergmann@linaro.org (Arnd Bergmann)
Date: Wed, 2 May 2012 13:32:44 +0000
Subject: [PATCH] clk: Use a separate struct for holding init data.
In-Reply-To: <20120502015650.GE17311@gmail.com>
References: <4d67387a86d99cbb4e2acf68d3588b1c.squirrel@www.codeaurora.org>
 <20120501181922.GD4089@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
 <20120502015650.GE17311@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <201205021332.44699.arnd.bergmann@linaro.org>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On Wednesday 02 May 2012, Mike Turquette wrote:
> I was happy to push my changes to Linus directly (as discussed in
> previous mails) but I'm starting to think that maybe having Arnd absorb
> the clk-next branch as part of arm-soc would be the fastest way to
> assist platforms that are porting over.
> 
> Do the platform folks agree?  Is this suggestion sane?

I guess that makes sense while there are still nontrivial
interdependencies between work going the clk-next branch and into
arm-soc.

	Arnd