Thread (58 messages) flat view 58 messages, 11 authors, 2014-07-08

[PATCH v4 7/8] ARM: Exynos: switch to using generic cpufreq-cpu0 driver

From: Thomas Abraham <hidden>
Date: 2014-05-14 14:09:58
Also in: linux-devicetree, linux-samsung-soc

On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 6:20 PM, Arnd Bergmann [off-list ref] wrote:
On Wednesday 14 May 2014 06:41:15 Thomas Abraham wrote:
quoted
From: Thomas Abraham <redacted>

Remove the platform device instantiation for Exynos specific cpufreq
driver and add the platform device for cpufreq-cpu0 driver.

Signed-off-by: Thomas Abraham <redacted>
---
 arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c |    4 +++-
 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c
index b32a907..489a495 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c
@@ -232,7 +232,9 @@ void __init exynos_cpuidle_init(void)

 void __init exynos_cpufreq_init(void)
 {
-       platform_device_register_simple("exynos-cpufreq", -1, NULL, 0);
+       if (!(of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos5420")) &&
+               !(of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos5440")))
+               platform_device_register_simple("cpufreq-cpu0", -1, NULL, 0);
 }
Could we please come up with a way to probe this from DT in the cpufreq-cpu0
driver itself, so we don't have to add a device in every platform using it?
Okay, I don't have a solution for this as of now. Would this be
considered as a blocker for this series? I hope we could just live
with this for now.

Thanks,
Thomas.
I realize you copied it from the other platforms using this driver, but
it still seems really wrong.

        Arnd
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help