Re: [PATCH] clk: Make the managed clk functions generically available - Russell King

From: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
To: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@avionic-design.de>
Cc: Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@metafoo.de>,
	Greg Ungerer <gerg@snapgear.com>,
	dedekind1@gmail.com,
	Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org,
	Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>,
	linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org, Greg Ungerer <gerg@uclinux.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	Mike Turquette <mturquette@ti.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] clk: Make the managed clk functions generically available
Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2012 21:40:14 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120918204014.GY12245@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120918112555.GA21004@avionic-0098.mockup.avionic-design.de>

On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 01:25:55PM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 10:35:36AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 10:00:37AM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote:
> > > On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 10:31:52PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:43:07PM +0200, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
> > > > > I wouldn't mind having this merged sooner rather than later, there is at least
> > > > > one driver in next which is currently broken due to the missing devm_clk_get.
> > > > > Russell what's your plan for the patch? Maybe under the given circumstances it
> > > > > makes sense to let it go through the m68k tree.
> > > > 
> > > > Ok, I've merged it but there was no indication in the patch that it was
> > > > supposed to be a fix... there's no cc: to stable.  Does it need to go to
> > > > stable?  When was this brokenness introduced?  What's the story for the
> > > > m68k bit?

I said abouve "I've merged it" - that means, I've put it in my
tree...

> > > What tree is this supposed to go through? I've checked your ARM tree as
> > > well as Mike's clock tree but neither seem to carry this patch. The
> > > reason I ask is because I want to take a patch series that converts the
> > > Unicore32 PWM code to the PWM framework into linux-next but it depends
> > > on this patch as well.
> > 
> > It /is/ in my tree (you'll notice that it is in linux-next.)  You're
> > probably looking at my Linaro tree instead, which doesn't carry
> > anything which isn't about to be sent to Linus.
> 
> I must be blind then. next-20120918 doesn't have it. And looking at your
> tree here[0] doesn't show the commit either.

Hmm, it's possible I didn't push the tree out... well, I have done so
now, so it should be visible from tonight onwards and should be in
-next sometime during the next couple of days (it seems to take a
couple of days between me pushing stuff out one evening to stuff
appearing in -next because of the timezones and timing of sfr's pulls.)