[PATCH v3 4/4] clk: bcm2835: Add PWM clock support to the device tree
eric at anholt.net
Wed Dec 16 12:05:10 PST 2015
Remi Pommarel <repk at triplefau.lt> writes:
> On Mon, Dec 07, 2015 at 08:09:47PM -0800, Eric Anholt wrote:
>> Stefan Wahren <info at lategoodbye.de> writes:
>> > Hi Remi,
>> > Am 07.12.2015 um 19:17 schrieb Remi Pommarel:
>> >> Hi Stefan,
>> >> On Sun, Dec 06, 2015 at 10:16:25PM +0100, Stefan Wahren wrote:
>> >>> Hi Remi,
>> >>> please send this patch to devicetree at vger.kernel.org.
>> >> Ok, just to be sure I understand the process here. I should resend a new
>> >> version of the whole patchset including the devicetree mailing list as
>> >> recipent. Then the first 3 patches will eventually get pushed by a clock
>> >> subsystem maintainer. And finally this last patch will be pushed by a
>> >> devicetree maintainer.
>> >> Am I right here ?
>> > sorry for the confusion. I mean that you send a copy to
>> > devicetree at vger.kernel.org so subscribers have a chance to review.
>> > I'm not sure but according to your subject you suggest that this dts
>> > patch should go through clock subsystem which isn't optimal. This should
>> > be better applied by Stephen or Eric.
>> It would be applied by me, but that's for me to worry about, not the
>> patch submitter. The subject prefix would be "ARM: bcm2835: ", but
>> that's trivial for me to fix when applying, not the kind of thing worth
>> asking for a respin for.
> Thanks for review.
> I'll submit dt patch to devicetree at vger.kernel.org for review. Is it better
> to submit the whole patchset (patch 1 to 4) to provide some context for the
> device tree patch or just this patch alone ?
I think you're fine sending just patch 4 -- the clk-bcm2835.c bugfixes
are between us and the clk maintainers, as far as I know. Check
scripts/get_maintainer.pl output to see who all should get the CC on it.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 818 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the linux-rpi-kernel