On Sat, 2009-10-31 at 14:01 +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote: > Hello Ben, > > > Have you considered switching to my proposed device-tree based clock > > reprentation ? > > You mean this one? > > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/31551/ > > Sorry, I have missed it up to now :( > > While I think (after one glimpse) this moves things into the right direction, > my priority at the moment is to get the mscan driver working on 512x (and then > to mainline). For that, I needed the patch I posted. I hope I can have another > look at your proposal later on, it looks really worth it. > > Until then I'd propose to consider this patch as it fixes a bug in clock > assignment. But I leave the final decision to you maintainers, of course.
Sure I don't have major objections against your patch (though who is formally mpc512x maintainer to ack it ?), I just wanted to make sure you had a look at my proposal since this is almost the only platform to use the clock API today in arch/powerpc. Cheers, Ben. _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
