On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 4:40 PM, Stephen Boyd <sb...@codeaurora.org> wrote: > On 05/01/15 15:07, Heiko Stübner wrote: >> Am Freitag, 1. Mai 2015, 13:52:47 schrieb Stephen Boyd: >> >>>> Instead I guess we could hook it less deep into clk_get_sys, like in the >>>> following patch? >>> It looks like it will work at least, but still I'd prefer to keep the >>> orphan check contained to clk.c. How about this compile tested only patch? >> I gave this a spin on my rk3288-firefly board. It still boots, the clock tree >> looks the same and it also still defers nicely in the scenario I needed it >> for. The implementation also looks nice - and of course much more compact >> than >> my check in two places :-) . I don't know if you want to put this as >> follow-up >> on top or fold it into the original orphan-check, so in any case >> >> Tested-by: Heiko Stuebner <he...@sntech.de> >> Reviewed-by: Heiko Stuebner <he...@sntech.de> > > Thanks. I'm leaning towards tossing your patch 2/2 and replacing it with > my patch and a note that it's based on an earlier patch from you.
It appears this has landed in linux-next in the form of 882667c1fcf1 clk: prevent orphan clocks from being used. A bunch of boot failures for sunxi in today's linux-next[1] were bisected down to that patch. I confirmed that reverting that commit on top of next/master gets sunxi booting again. Kevin [1] http://kernelci.org/boot/all/job/next/kernel/next-20150507/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/