Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 27 Jun 2012 21:29:20 +0530 | From | Laxman Dewangan <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] i2c: tegra: use clk_disable_unprepare in place of clk_disable |
| |
On Tuesday 26 June 2012 09:58 PM, Stephen Warren wrote: > On 06/26/2012 12:27 AM, Laxman Dewangan wrote: >> On Monday 25 June 2012 09:25 PM, Stephen Warren wrote: >>> On 06/25/2012 03:46 AM, Laxman Dewangan wrote: >>>> Stephen, >>>> >>>> On Wednesday 20 June 2012 09:57 PM, Stephen Warren wrote: >>>>> On 06/20/2012 10:26 AM, Stephen Warren wrote: >>>>>> On 06/20/2012 06:56 AM, Laxman Dewangan wrote: >>>>>>> Use clk_disable_unprepare() inplace of clk_disable(). >>>>>>> This was missed as part of moving clock enable/disable to >>>>>>> prepare/unprepare for using the common clock framework. >>>>> ... >>>>>> I see no reason not to take the second patch in the series through the >>>>>> I2C tree though. >>>>> Uggh. Ignore that paragraph - the other patch was sent separately >>>>> not as >>>>> a series. >>>> so are you taking care of this patch or do I need to send the patch >>>> based on your tree in place of linux-next? >>> Yes, this patch should be applied through the Tegra tree, since it will >>> be a dependency of the common clock framework switchover there, which I >>> hope to take place this kernel cycle. >>> >>> I did just attempt to apply this patch to the for-3.6/common-clk branch, >>> but it doesn't apply:-( Could you please rebase and resend. Thanks. >> Looked at your common_clk branch and the related code is not there. >> The clk_disable() in the particular case is introduced by change >> i2c: tegra: make all resource allocation through devm_* >> which is not in your branch. >> >> Then later Prashant post the change as >> i2c: tegra: Add clk_prepare/clk_unprepare >> and it does not accounted for the above patch. >> >> So none of your local tree will have this issue. > OK. In that case, it's best if this patch goes through the I2C tree > since that's where the code is that it's modifying. This might not be > optimal for runtime git bisection depending on the order Linus ends up > merging things, but it's probably as good as we can do without > inter-twining the I2C and Tegra trees a lot.
Then it can go Wolfram's tree along with other patch i2c: tegra: remove unused member variable.
as some of previous i2c patches are in his tree.
| |