On 27/06/2023 11:02, Marijn Suijten wrote: >>>>> So deleting a new item at the end does not matter. But what if I respin >>>>> this patch to add the new clock _at the end_, which will then be at the >>>>> same index as the previous GCC_DISP_AHB_CLK? >>>> >>>> I think you know the answer, right? What do you want to prove? That two >>>> independent changes can have together negative effect? We know this. >>> >>> The question is whether this is allowed? >> >> That would be an ABI break and I already explained if it is or is not >> allowed. > > How should we solve it then, if we cannot remove GCC_DISP_AHB_CLK in one > patch and add GCC_DISP_GPLL0_DIV_CLK_SRC **at the end** in the next > patch? Keep an empty spot at the original index of GCC_DISP_AHB_CLK?
I don't know if you are trolling me or really asking question, so just in case it is the latter: "No one is locked into the ABI. SoC maintainer decides on this. " Also: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/20230608152759.ga2721945-r...@kernel.org/ https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/cal_jsqkoq+pdjupvyqdc7qcjgxp-kbag_o9e+zrfy7k-wrr...@mail.gmail.com/ https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/20220602143245.ga2256965-r...@kernel.org/ https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/20220601202452.ga365963-r...@kernel.org/ Any many more. Best regards, Krzysztof
