On Fri, Mar 27, 2026 at 11:42 AM Danilo Krummrich <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri Mar 27, 2026 at 4:17 PM CET, Brian Masney wrote: > > I am not a clk maintainer, so I can't leave an Acked-by for you to > > pick this up unfortunately. I've been quite active in the clk > > subsystem though the last 6 months or so. > > I'm not involved in the CLK subsystem, but maybe it would be a good chance to > offer stepping up as co-maintainer (also given that Michael seems to be > inactive > for a couple of years now). :)
I mentioned to Stephen at the last LPC in Tokyo that I am interested in becoming a clk co-maintainer. I've sent him some git pulls for some of my work the last few development cycles, and he's pulled them. For this development cycle, I collected up some patches from others that I feel are ready, however I didn't hear back from Stephen yet: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-clk/[email protected]/ He separately pulled some of that work via the posted patches into clk-next this week. I don't know if there was something he didn't like in my git pull. To be honest, I initially helped with reviews trying to free up time for him to give feedback about my work to address some long-standing issues related to clk scaling that affect DRM and sound: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-clk/[email protected]/ The kunit tests in patch 2 and 4 clearly show the issues. (I'm working on some fixes to this series right now based on feedback from Sashiko.) I've become more interested in the clk subsystem as I learn more about it. There are other improvements that I am willing to make to the clk subsystem, however the current situation has been quite challenging to be honest. I will help with the linux-clk subsystem for the long term if there is the possibility of me eventually becoming a co-maintainer. Stephen can have veto power over what goes in. Brian
