Re: [PATCH V3 0/3] Add clock framework for armada 370/XP

From: Gregory CLEMENT
Date: Sun Oct 21 2012 - 08:21:07 EST


On 10/17/2012 05:39 PM, Jason Cooper wrote:
> Mike,
>
> On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 02:18:16PM +0200, Gregory CLEMENT wrote:
>> Hello Mike,
>>
>> The v3.7-rc1 was released yesterday. So here it is the updated version
>> of my patch set. The rebase was flawless. An I have just fixed a typo
>> in the device tree and warnings from checkpatch. I built and test it
>> for the Armada 370 and Armada XP evaluation board.
>>
>> The purpose of this patch set is to add support for clock framework
>> for Armada 370 and Armada XP SoCs. All the support is done under the
>> directory drivers/clk/mvebu/ as the support for other mvebu SoCs was
>> in mind during the writing of the code.
>>
>> Two kinds of clocks are added:
>>
>> - The CPU clocks are only for Armada XP (which is multi-core)
>>
>> - The core clocks are clocks which have their rate fixed during
>> reset.
>>
>> Many thanks to Thomas Petazzoni and Sebastian Hesselbarth for their
>> review and feedback. The device tree bindings were really improved
>> with the advices of Sebastian.
>>
>> Changelog:
>> V2 -> V3:
>> - Rebased on top of v3.7-rc1
>> - Fixed a typo in device trees
>> - Fixed warning from checkpatch
>>
>> V1 -> V2:
>>
>> - Improved the spelling and the wording of the documentation and the
>> 1st commit log
>> - Removed the "end_of_list" name which are unused here.
>> - Fix the cpu clock by using of_clk_src_onecell_get in the same way it
>> was used for the core clocks
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>>
>> Gregory CLEMENT (3):
>> clk: mvebu: add armada-370-xp specific clocks
>> clk: armada-370-xp: add support for clock framework
>> clocksource: time-armada-370-xp converted to clk framework
>>
>> .../devicetree/bindings/clock/mvebu-core-clock.txt | 40 +++
>> .../devicetree/bindings/clock/mvebu-cpu-clock.txt | 21 ++
>> arch/arm/boot/dts/armada-370-db.dts | 4 -
>> arch/arm/boot/dts/armada-370-xp.dtsi | 1 +
>> arch/arm/boot/dts/armada-370.dtsi | 12 +
>> arch/arm/boot/dts/armada-xp.dtsi | 48 +++
>> arch/arm/mach-mvebu/Kconfig | 5 +
>> arch/arm/mach-mvebu/armada-370-xp.c | 8 +-
>> arch/arm/mach-mvebu/common.h | 1 +
>> drivers/clk/Makefile | 1 +
>> drivers/clk/mvebu/Makefile | 2 +
>> drivers/clk/mvebu/clk-core.c | 312 ++++++++++++++++++++
>> drivers/clk/mvebu/clk-core.h | 19 ++
>> drivers/clk/mvebu/clk-cpu.c | 155 ++++++++++
>> drivers/clk/mvebu/clk-cpu.h | 19 ++
>> drivers/clk/mvebu/clk.c | 36 +++
>> drivers/clocksource/time-armada-370-xp.c | 11 +-
>> 17 files changed, 685 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/mvebu-core-clock.txt
>> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/mvebu-cpu-clock.txt
>> create mode 100644 drivers/clk/mvebu/Makefile
>> create mode 100644 drivers/clk/mvebu/clk-core.c
>> create mode 100644 drivers/clk/mvebu/clk-core.h
>> create mode 100644 drivers/clk/mvebu/clk-cpu.c
>> create mode 100644 drivers/clk/mvebu/clk-cpu.h
>> create mode 100644 drivers/clk/mvebu/clk.c
>
> Would it be okay if we took this through the mvebu tree? It looks like
> the only potential merge conflict we would have would be in
> drivers/clk/Makefile. It would make dependency tracking easier.
>

It will also be easier for me if it was possible, because I have
patch series awaiting which will depend on the support of the
clock framework for mvebu.

> Otherwise is fine as well, just let me know which you prefer.
>
> Assuming, of course, everything looks good to you.
>
> thx,
>
> Jason.
>
> _______________________________________________
> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
> linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
>


--
Gregory Clement, Free Electrons
Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux
development, consulting, training and support.
http://free-electrons.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/