Hi Stephen, On Fri, 2016-08-12 at 17:39 -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote: > On 08/12, James Liao wrote: > > On Wed, 2016-08-10 at 14:09 -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote: > > > (Including lists) > > > > > > On 08/09, James Liao wrote: > > > > On Wed, 2016-08-03 at 13:46 +0800, James Liao wrote: > > > >> > > > >> 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 <jamesjj.l...@mediatek.com> > 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
