From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965072AbdALBaZ (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Jan 2017 20:30:25 -0500 Received: from bh-25.webhostbox.net ([208.91.199.152]:42560 "EHLO bh-25.webhostbox.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751778AbdALBaX (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Jan 2017 20:30:23 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH 56/62] watchdog: tangox_wdt: Convert to use device managed functions To: Andy Shevchenko References: <1484091325-9199-1-git-send-email-linux@roeck-us.net> <1484100561-17638-1-git-send-email-linux@roeck-us.net> <1484100561-17638-5-git-send-email-linux@roeck-us.net> <94c4d5c0-f639-eab1-6706-335977690e88@roeck-us.net> Cc: Marc Gonzalez , Wim Van Sebroeck , linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org, "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , linux-arm Mailing List , Mans Rullgard , Thibaud Cornic From: Guenter Roeck Message-ID: <0c2648fd-ccf2-c7cf-6c7a-1519bf7e035f@roeck-us.net> Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2017 17:29:41 -0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.5.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Authenticated_sender: linux@roeck-us.net X-OutGoing-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - bh-25.webhostbox.net X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - vger.kernel.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - roeck-us.net X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: bh-25.webhostbox.net: authenticated_id: linux@roeck-us.net X-Authenticated-Sender: bh-25.webhostbox.net: linux@roeck-us.net X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 01/11/2017 04:12 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 12:52 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote: >> On 01/11/2017 01:07 AM, Marc Gonzalez wrote: >> Not really. It would just make it more complicated to replace the >> call with devm_clk_prepare_enable(), should it ever find its way >> into the light of day. > Actually what is the status to the patch series which brings devm_clk > stuff like prepare_enable()? It was submitted 2(?) years ago. > It stalled. Guenter