Re: [PATCH V4 00/20] Tegra210 DFLL support

On 1/28/19 3:54 PM, Thierry Reding wrote:

On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 09:43:00AM +0800, Joseph Lo wrote:

quoted

On 1/25/19 9:46 PM, Thierry Reding wrote:

quoted

On Fri, Jan 04, 2019 at 11:06:42AM +0800, Joseph Lo wrote:

quoted

This series introduces support for the DFLL as a CPU clock source
on Tegra210. As Jetson TX1 uses a PWM controlled regulator IC which
is driven directly by the DFLLs PWM output, we also introduce support
for PWM regulators next to I2C controlled regulators. The DFLL output
frequency is directly controlled by the regulator voltage. The registers
for controlling the PWM are part of the DFLL IP block, so there's no
separate linux regulator object involved because the regulator IC only
supplies the rail powering the CPUs. It doesn't have any other controls.

[snip]

quoted

quoted

Joseph,

can you detail the dependencies between the various patches. From a
brief look the CPU frequency driver changes are completely separate
bits and it should be possible to apply them to the cpufreq tree.

The clock changes also seem independent of the rest.

Are there any dependencies at all that we need to be mindful about?
Or can individual maintainers just pick up the subseries directly?

Yes, no dependence with each other. We can apply them separately.
Please let me know if I need to inform cpufreq or clk maintainer to pick
them up.

Rafael,

the three CPU frequency patches in this series were acked by Viresh
already, but unfortunately you don't seem to be Cc'ed on these. Are
you okay with me picking these up into the Tegra tree and send you
a pull request in a couple of days? That way we can get the whole
set tested a bit in linux-next. If you'd prefer to pick these up in
the PM tree, here are the corresponding patchwork links:

	https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10747943/
	https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10747947/
	https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10747953/

I'll go and give my Acked-by on these patches if the latter is the
way you prefer.


Stephen, Mike,

the same applies for clk patches. Stephen's acked all of them and I
think all of the series is good to go. How about if I pick up these
up in the Tegra tree and let this all cook in linux-next for a week
or so and then send you a pull request with these? Stephen already
picked up a couple of fixes for clk/tegra, but I don't think any of
those would conflict with this series.

All of that said, Joseph confirmed that there are no dependencies
between these subsystem subseries, so if you'd prefer to pick up the
patches into your respective trees, I have no objections to that.

Thierry

Hi Rafael, Stephen,

Gental ping. Please let Thierry know if the cpufreq and DFLL clock 
related changes can go through Tegra tree.

I know Rafael did say [1] it's okay to go through Tegra tree in earlier 
comment.

Thanks,
Joseph

[1]: http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/1015181/

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel