From: Paul Bolle <pebolle@tiscali.nl>
To: Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@atmel.com>
Cc: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@free-electrons.com>,
Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@atmel.com>,
Josh Wu <josh.wu@atmel.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mturquette@baylibre.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] clk: at91: add generated clock driver
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2015 16:46:46 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1434638806.2385.91.camel@x220> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5582BC50.1050801@atmel.com>
Hi Nicolas,
On Thu, 2015-06-18 at 14:40 +0200, Nicolas Ferre wrote:
> I have several options here:
>
> 1/ I send the clock patch early and benefit from early review and a
> comfortable landing strip
>
> 2/ I send the SoC early and have the very same remark concerning the
> "+ select HAVE_AT91_GENERATED" line in my patch
(In that case that line could be part of the patch adding the clock
driver. That might work too. Depends on how things fit together,
obviously.)
> 3/ I do it in several separated series... but at the price of additional
> synchronization between subsystems, additional dumb patches with so
> little benefit in my opinion.
Would one series for everything you plan to submit have worked here or
would that grow unwieldy?
Anyhow, would I have known that the code that actually enables this
driver to build was pending this discussion would not have started. (I
do try to check for related patches, on lkml that is, even if they're
not part of the same series etc.) Say, with a small remark below the ---
line as we discussed. And would I then have started a thread like this
you could point a finger at me and shout: "Paul can't read! Na na na na
na! Paul can't read!"
> Ok, so I post sama5d2 early support today so that we can agree it's not
> necessary to add superfluous steps.
I see.
Thanks,
Paul Bolle
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: pebolle@tiscali.nl (Paul Bolle)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] clk: at91: add generated clock driver
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2015 16:46:46 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1434638806.2385.91.camel@x220> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5582BC50.1050801@atmel.com>
Hi Nicolas,
On Thu, 2015-06-18 at 14:40 +0200, Nicolas Ferre wrote:
> I have several options here:
>
> 1/ I send the clock patch early and benefit from early review and a
> comfortable landing strip
>
> 2/ I send the SoC early and have the very same remark concerning the
> "+ select HAVE_AT91_GENERATED" line in my patch
(In that case that line could be part of the patch adding the clock
driver. That might work too. Depends on how things fit together,
obviously.)
> 3/ I do it in several separated series... but at the price of additional
> synchronization between subsystems, additional dumb patches with so
> little benefit in my opinion.
Would one series for everything you plan to submit have worked here or
would that grow unwieldy?
Anyhow, would I have known that the code that actually enables this
driver to build was pending this discussion would not have started. (I
do try to check for related patches, on lkml that is, even if they're
not part of the same series etc.) Say, with a small remark below the ---
line as we discussed. And would I then have started a thread like this
you could point a finger at me and shout: "Paul can't read! Na na na na
na! Paul can't read!"
> Ok, so I post sama5d2 early support today so that we can agree it's not
> necessary to add superfluous steps.
I see.
Thanks,
Paul Bolle
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-06-18 14:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-06-17 13:23 [PATCH] clk: at91: add generated clock driver Nicolas Ferre
2015-06-17 13:23 ` Nicolas Ferre
2015-06-18 7:12 ` Paul Bolle
2015-06-18 7:12 ` Paul Bolle
2015-06-18 7:33 ` Boris Brezillon
2015-06-18 7:33 ` Boris Brezillon
2015-06-18 7:40 ` Nicolas Ferre
2015-06-18 7:40 ` Nicolas Ferre
2015-06-18 7:54 ` Paul Bolle
2015-06-18 7:54 ` Paul Bolle
2015-06-18 12:40 ` Nicolas Ferre
2015-06-18 12:40 ` Nicolas Ferre
2015-06-18 14:46 ` Paul Bolle [this message]
2015-06-18 14:46 ` Paul Bolle
2015-06-18 12:59 ` Alexandre Belloni
2015-06-18 12:59 ` Alexandre Belloni
2015-06-18 13:28 ` Nicolas Ferre
2015-06-18 13:28 ` Nicolas Ferre
2015-06-18 15:11 ` Paul Bolle
2015-06-18 15:11 ` Paul Bolle
2015-06-18 7:44 ` Paul Bolle
2015-06-18 7:44 ` Paul Bolle
2015-06-18 15:25 ` Boris Brezillon
2015-06-18 15:25 ` Boris Brezillon
2015-06-22 16:50 ` Nicolas Ferre
2015-06-22 16:50 ` Nicolas Ferre
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1434638806.2385.91.camel@x220 \
--to=pebolle@tiscali.nl \
--cc=alexandre.belloni@free-electrons.com \
--cc=boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com \
--cc=josh.wu@atmel.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ludovic.desroches@atmel.com \
--cc=mturquette@baylibre.com \
--cc=nicolas.ferre@atmel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.