[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