Hi Stephen,

On Fri, 2016-08-12 at 17:39 -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:

On 08/12, James Liao wrote:

quoted

On Wed, 2016-08-10 at 14:09 -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:

quoted

(Including lists)

On 08/09, James Liao wrote:

quoted

On Wed, 2016-08-03 at 13:46 +0800, James Liao wrote:

quoted

Hi Mike,

Do you have new patches to fix new clock parents? If not, I think we can
use my patch first. Is it okay?

Hi Stephen,

Do you have comments for the bug fixing? I prefer to use my patch (clk:
fix initial state of critical clock's parents). How do you think?

How about we recalc accuracies and rates in addition to the patch
from Mike? That will fix everything?

Hi Stephen,

It works!

I'll send a new series of MT2701 clock support in few days. Should I
include this patch in my series? Or you'll merge it into clk-next
directly?

Thanks. I can take that as a tested-by? I can merge it into

Yes, please feel free to add:

Tested-by: James Liao <redacted>

clk-next directly, but do we need to put the mt2701 patches on a
separate branch to merge into arm-soc? If so we'll need to put
this patch first to avoid bisection failures.

I prefer to merge clk driver into mainline first. Patches that depend on
mt2701 clks such as dtsi can base on next kernel release.


Best regards,

James