[PATCH v2 2/2] clk: qcom: gcc-sdm660: Remove transient global "xo" clock

[Stephen Boyd]

Quoting Marijn Suijten (2021-09-02 06:05:34)
> On 2021-09-01 20:46:34, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > Quoting Marijn Suijten (2021-09-01 01:57:15)
> > > On 2021-08-31 22:35:56, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > > > Quoting Marijn Suijten (2021-08-30 11:24:45)
> > > > > The DSI PHY/PLL was relying on a global "xo" clock to be found, but the
> > > > > real clock is named "xo_board" in the DT.  The standard nowadays is to
> > > > > never use global clock names anymore but require the firmware (DT) to
> > > > > provide every clock binding explicitly with .fw_name.  The DSI PLLs have
> > > > > since been converted to this mechanism (specifically 14nm for SDM660)
> > > > > and this transient clock can now be removed.
> > > > > 
> > > > > This issue was originally discovered in:
> > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/386db1a6-a1cd-3c7d-a88e-dc83f8a1be96@somainline.org/
> > > > > and prevented the removal of "xo" at that time.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Marijn Suijten <marijn.suijten at somainline.org>
> > > > > ---
> > > > 
> > > > Presumably this wants to go with the first one.
> > > 
> > > What are you referring to with "the first one"?  This patch can only go
> > > in after patch 1/2 of this series, unless you are suggesting to squash
> > > it with Bjorns cleanup and making sure that lands after the fix in the
> > > DSI?
> > 
> > The first patch in this series.
> 
> Are you suggesting to squash this patch into the first patch in this
> series?  Note that the first patch touches drm/msm/dsi, the second
> (this) patch touches clk/qcom.

No.