Re: [PATCH 4/8] clk: tegra: Fix duplicate const for parent names

From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>
To: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>
Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>,
	Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@gmail.com>,
	Barry Song <baohua@kernel.org>,
	Prashant Gaikwad <pgaikwad@nvidia.com>,
	Mike Turquette <mturquette@linaro.org>,
	Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de>,
	Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org>,
	Peter De Schrijver <pdeschrijver@nvidia.com>,
	Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>,
	Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@gmail.com>,
	Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Max Filippov <jcmvbkbc@gmail.com>,
	Kukjin Kim <kgene@kernel.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	Sylwester Nawrocki <s.nawrocki@samsung.com>,
	linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org, linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-clk@vger.kernel.org, linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/8] clk: tegra: Fix duplicate const for parent names
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 2015 12:33:16 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAJKOXPfQW-9m7a5S8oRy7dpHLOodvVq44vHV=wVnG8WjOeP_EA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150409101947.GM12103@ulmo>

2015-04-09 12:19 GMT+02:00 Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>:
> On Thu, Apr 09, 2015 at 12:07:59PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> 2015-04-09 12:00 GMT+02:00 Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>:
>> > On Wed, Apr 08, 2015 at 03:22:15PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> >> Replace duplicated const keyword for 'emc_parent_clk_names' with proper
>> >> array of const pointers to const strings.
>> >>
>> >> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>
>> >> ---
>> >>  drivers/clk/tegra/clk-emc.c | 2 +-
>> >>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>> >
>> > This would probably better go in via the Tegra tree since the patch that
>> > contains this has only made it to linux-next.
>> >
>> > Stephen, Mike, any objections to me taking this?
>>
>> Applying this without the change for const-ness of parent_names (patch
>> by Sascha Hauer sent before mine [1]) would introduce a warning -
>> assign of const to non-const. Any idea to solve it? Immutable branch?
>
> Right, I had missed that. Immutable branch would work, though perhaps
> it'd be easier to just defer this until after v4.1-rc1. The warning
> shouldn't happen if we leave out this single patch and apply it later
> on, right?

That would be fine with me. I think it would better to apply patches
now if they are applicable.

Best regards,
Krzysztof