From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752551AbdDLIAo (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Apr 2017 04:00:44 -0400 Received: from mail-wm0-f48.google.com ([74.125.82.48]:35878 "EHLO mail-wm0-f48.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752192AbdDLIAm (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Apr 2017 04:00:42 -0400 Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2017 09:00:38 +0100 From: Lee Jones To: Daniel Lezcano Cc: sboyd@codeaurora.org, mturquette@baylibre.com, xuwei5@hisilicon.com, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-clk@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] clk: hi6220: Add the hi655x's pmic clock Message-ID: <20170412080038.kk4vrjhvr3eao26q@dell> References: <1491683412-12237-1-git-send-email-daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> <20170411140613.jvhzsvrxa4evwxjh@dell> <20170411211936.GT2078@mai> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20170411211936.GT2078@mai> User-Agent: Mutt/1.6.2-neo (2016-08-21) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 11 Apr 2017, Daniel Lezcano wrote: > On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 03:06:13PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote: > > On Sat, 08 Apr 2017, Daniel Lezcano wrote: > > > > > The hi655x multi function device is a PMIC providing regulators. > > > > > > The PMIC also provides a clock for the WiFi and the Bluetooth, let's implement > > > this clock in order to add it in the hi655x MFD and allow proper wireless > > > initialization. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano > > > --- > > > > > > Changelog: > > > > > > V2: > > > - Added COMPILE_TEST option, compiled on x86 > > > - Removed useless parenthesis > > > - Used of_clk_hw_simple_get() instead of deref dance > > > - Do bailout if the clock-names is not specified > > > - Rollback on error > > > - Folded mfd line change and binding > > > > Why did you do that? > > I thought as the V1 had comments you would have waited for the V2 and as it was > trivial enough, it could be folded and picked up via the clk tree via with your > acked-by. It's *always* a good idea to keep patches subsystem orthogonal if at all possible. > I realize it was not a good idea. > > Do you want to drop it from your tree or shall I resubmit a V3 without the mfd > change? The latter please. -- Lee Jones Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog