On Tue, Oct 02, 2018 at 11:50:09AM +0100, Liviu Dudau wrote:
On Mon, Oct 01, 2018 at 11:26:37AM -0400, Tom Rini wrote:
On Mon, Oct 01, 2018 at 04:16:45PM +0100, Liviu Dudau wrote:
On Mon, Oct 01, 2018 at 07:36:12AM -0400, Tom Rini wrote:
On Mon, Oct 01, 2018 at 10:20:22AM +0100, Liviu Dudau wrote:
On Sun, Sep 30, 2018 at 03:24:56PM -0400, Tom Rini wrote:
On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 05:50:00PM +0100, Liviu Dudau wrote:
> The Arm Versatile Express and Juno development boards contain an > OSC clock generator that can be accessed through the Versatile > Express config bus. The generators are quite often being controlled > by some MCU and the config bus offers a uniform way of exposing them. > > Signed-off-by: Liviu Dudau liviu.dudau@foss.arm.com > Reviewed-by: Heiko Schocher hs@denx.de
Applied to u-boot/master, thanks!
Thanks! The MAINTAINERS entry will get applied at a different time, I guess? (I know there is some implicit order there, with the vexpress_config.c driver introducing the entry, but the OSC driver is not useful without that driver)
I don't see a patch that update the MAINTAINERS file right now, can you please resend it? Thanks!
Apologies, I was under the impression that I have sent the v2 for this patch as well, which had the MAINTAINERS update.
Do you want me to send a patch only for the MAINTAINERS update? Should that patch add the VExpress config bus entry as well (will conflict with v2 of that patch anyway)?
Ah, OK, I see now. Let me also bring in Linus Walleij on this too. U-Boot has split the MAINTAINERS file up for a while now and stuff like these platform specific drivers should get popped into board/armltd/vexpress/MAINTAINERS or board/armltd/vexpress64/MAINTAINERS (I'd also be open, I suppose, to creating board/armltd/MAINTAINERS if it's more sensical, but... could we squash vexpress64 into the main vexpress directory or does that make no sense?). And, oops, I see that Linus should have been cc'd on this patch and I should wait for him to review the others[1] too.
I'm a bit confused on how this would work. The MAINTAINERS entry I'm talking about is for the OSC clk driver. Does this mean I will have to update both board files with the same info? I thought board specific MAINTAINERS files are for specifying who's looking over the board functionality overall?
Well, I guess my point is given that we have more than one MAINTAINERS file, does it make more sense for this to be in say drivers/clk/MAINTAINERS or board/armltd/something/MAINTAINERS or the top-level file. And I further guess I'll withdraw the question for now as I see no one else yet is doing that, so yes, we can keep it top level for now. Thanks!