On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 12:18:45PM +0000, Fabrizio Castro wrote: > Hello Geert, > > Thank you for your feedback! > > > From: Geert Uytterhoeven <ge...@linux-m68k.org> > > Sent: 23 January 2019 12:08 > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] arm64: dts: renesas: r8a774a1: Add clkp2 clock to > > CAN nodes > > > > Hi Fabrizio, > > > > On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 1:01 PM Fabrizio Castro > > <fabrizio.cas...@bp.renesas.com> wrote: > > > > From: Simon Horman <ho...@verge.net.au> > > > > Sent: 23 January 2019 11:38 > > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] arm64: dts: renesas: r8a774a1: Add clkp2 clock > > > > to CAN nodes > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 10:51:23AM +0100, Simon Horman wrote: > > > > > On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 01:13:53PM +0100, Simon Horman wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 02:54:15PM +0000, Fabrizio Castro wrote: > > > > > > > According to the latest information, clkp2 is available on RZ/G2. > > > > > > > Modify CAN0 and CAN1 nodes accordingly. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Fabrizio Castro <fabrizio.cas...@bp.renesas.com> > > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Chris Paterson <chris.paters...@renesas.com> > > > > > > > Thanks again, applied for v5.1. > > > > > > > > Sorry, I was a little hasty there. > > > > > > > > This patch depends on the presence of R8A774A1_CLK_CANFD which > > > > (rightly) is added in a different patch in this series which is to > > > > go upstream via a different tree. > > > > > > > > I have dropped this patch for now. I think there are two solution to > > > > this > > > > problem. > > > > > > > > 1. Provide a version of this patch which uses a numeric index instead of > > > > R8A774A1_CLK_CANFD. And then, once R8A774A1_CLK_CANFD is present in > > > > an > > > > RC release provide a patch to switch to using R8A774A1_CLK_CANFD. > > > > > > > > 2. Defer this patch until R8A774A1_CLK_CANFD is present in an RC > > > > release. > > > > > > Yeah, my personal preference is solution 2. > > > > Note that solution 2 will probably defer the DT patch to v5.2. > > Yeah, my understanding is that even if we chose solution 1 we would still > need to be waiting for v5.2 for the patch to switch to using > R8A774A1_CLK_CANFD to appear in a rc, therefore I think solution 2 is > fine.
Your understanding is the same as mine. I do seem some slight value in option 1 in terms of getting the change, less the minor issue of using an index rather than a symbol, upstream earlier. But I do not feel strongly about this. I am marking this patch as deferred. Please repost or otherwise ping me when you would like to revisit this topic.
