From: Michael Turquette <hidden> Date: 2015-08-11 18:25:35
Hi Scott,
Quoting Scott Wood (2015-06-18 19:49:10)
The existing device tree bindings are error-prone and inflexible. =
Correct the mistake by moving the knowledge into the driver, which
has more flexibility in describing the quirks of each chip. This leaves
the device tree to its proper role of identifying a programming interface
rather than describing its individual registers.
Sorry for not responding to this one sooner. Fell through the cracks.
All of the changes to drives/clk/clk-qoriq.c look great to me. I assume
you need to keep all of these patches together and want to the take
through the freescale tree? If so feel free to add,
Acked-by: Michael Turquette <mturquette@baylibre.com>
Regards,
Mike
=
For more detail, see the commit message of patch 4.
=
Scott Wood (8):
ARM: dts: ls1021a: Fix clockgen node
cpufreq: qoriq: Don't look at clock implementation details
powerpc/fsl: Move fsl_guts.h out of arch/powerpc
clk: qoriq: Move chip-specific knowledge into driver
clk: qoriq: Redirect legacy clock nodes to new clocks
cpufreq: qoriq: Remove frequency masking and minimum
clk: qoriq: Expose OF clocks directly from the clockgen node
powerpc/fsl: Use new clockgen binding
=
From: Scott Wood <hidden> Date: 2015-08-15 06:43:37
On Tue, 2015-08-11 at 11:25 -0700, Michael Turquette wrote:
Hi Scott,
Quoting Scott Wood (2015-06-18 19:49:10)
quoted
The existing device tree bindings are error-prone and inflexible.
Correct the mistake by moving the knowledge into the driver, which
has more flexibility in describing the quirks of each chip. This leaves
the device tree to its proper role of identifying a programming interface
rather than describing its individual registers.
Sorry for not responding to this one sooner. Fell through the cracks.
All of the changes to drives/clk/clk-qoriq.c look great to me. I assume
you need to keep all of these patches together and want to the take
through the freescale tree? If so feel free to add,
Acked-by: Michael Turquette <mturquette@baylibre.com>
I just sent a non-RFC v2, with improved compatibility with old device trees
(especially ls1021a). It depends on the cpufreq patch though (at least, to
avoid breaking qoriq-cpufreq until that patch is merged), so I'll also need
an ack from Rafael for that if I'm taking it through my tree.
-Scott
From: Scott Wood <hidden> Date: 2015-10-02 00:23:54
On Tue, 2015-08-11 at 11:25 -0700, Michael Turquette wrote:
Hi Scott,
Quoting Scott Wood (2015-06-18 19:49:10)
quoted
The existing device tree bindings are error-prone and inflexible.
Correct the mistake by moving the knowledge into the driver, which
has more flexibility in describing the quirks of each chip. This leaves
the device tree to its proper role of identifying a programming interface
rather than describing its individual registers.
Sorry for not responding to this one sooner. Fell through the cracks.
All of the changes to drives/clk/clk-qoriq.c look great to me. I assume
you need to keep all of these patches together and want to the take
through the freescale tree? If so feel free to add,
Acked-by: Michael Turquette <mturquette@baylibre.com>
Is the ack still valid for the v3 patchset?
-Scott
From: Scott Wood <hidden> Date: 2015-10-02 00:26:29
[Resending to updated e-mail address]
On Tue, 2015-08-11 at 11:25 -0700, Michael Turquette wrote:
Hi Scott,
Quoting Scott Wood (2015-06-18 19:49:10)
quoted
The existing device tree bindings are error-prone and inflexible.
Correct the mistake by moving the knowledge into the driver, which
has more flexibility in describing the quirks of each chip. This leaves
the device tree to its proper role of identifying a programming interface
rather than describing its individual registers.
Sorry for not responding to this one sooner. Fell through the cracks.
All of the changes to drives/clk/clk-qoriq.c look great to me. I assume
you need to keep all of these patches together and want to the take
through the freescale tree? If so feel free to add,
Acked-by: Michael Turquette <mturquette@baylibre.com>
Is the ack still valid for the v3 patchset?
-Scott
From: Scott Wood <hidden> Date: 2015-10-09 23:57:44
On Thu, 2015-10-01 at 19:26 -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
[Resending to updated e-mail address]
On Tue, 2015-08-11 at 11:25 -0700, Michael Turquette wrote:
quoted
Hi Scott,
Quoting Scott Wood (2015-06-18 19:49:10)
quoted
The existing device tree bindings are error-prone and inflexible.
Correct the mistake by moving the knowledge into the driver, which
has more flexibility in describing the quirks of each chip. This leaves
the device tree to its proper role of identifying a programming
interface
rather than describing its individual registers.
Sorry for not responding to this one sooner. Fell through the cracks.
All of the changes to drives/clk/clk-qoriq.c look great to me. I assume
you need to keep all of these patches together and want to the take
through the freescale tree? If so feel free to add,
Acked-by: Michael Turquette <mturquette@baylibre.com>