[PATCH v7 5/6] ARM: Exynos: switch to using generic cpufreq driver for exynos4210/5250/5420

[Thomas Abraham]

On Sat, Jul 19, 2014 at 6:57 PM, Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 14.07.2014 15:38, Thomas Abraham wrote:
>> From: Thomas Abraham <thomas.ab at samsung.com>
>>
>> Remove the platform device instantiation for exynos cpufreq driver and add the
>> platform device for generic cpufreq drivers.
>>
>> Cc: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim at samsung.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Thomas Abraham <thomas.ab at samsung.com>
>> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar at linaro.org>
>> Reviewed-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.daniel at samsung.com>
>> Tested-by: Arjun K.V <arjun.kv at samsung.com>
>> ---
>>  arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c |   15 ++++++++++++++-
>>  1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c
>> index 2a43a17..5028b35 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c
>> @@ -183,7 +183,20 @@ void __init exynos_cpuidle_init(void)
>>
>>  void __init exynos_cpufreq_init(void)
>>  {
>> -     platform_device_register_simple("exynos-cpufreq", -1, NULL, 0);
>> +     char *dev_name;
>> +
>> +     if (of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos5440"))
>> +             return;
>
> The original code registers the device unconditionally. Why Exynos5440
> is excluded now?
>
>> +     if (of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos5420"))
>> +             dev_name = "arm-bL-cpufreq-dt";
>> +     else
>> +             if (of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos4412") ||
>> +                     of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos4212"))
>> +                     dev_name = "exynos-cpufreq";
>> +             else
>> +                     dev_name = "cpufreq-cpu0";
>> +
>> +     platform_device_register_simple(dev_name, -1, NULL, 0);
>>  }
>
> How about rewriting this to:
>
> static const struct of_device_id exynos_cpufreq_matches[] = {
>         { .compatible = "samsung,exynos5420",
>                         .data = "arm-bL-cpufreq-dt" },
>         { .compatible = "samsung,exynos5250",
>                         .data = "cpufreq-cpu0" },
>         { .compatible = "samsung,exynos4210",
>                         .data = "cpufreq-cpu0" },
>         { /* sentinel */ }
> };
>
> void __init exynos_cpufreq_init(void)
> {
>         struct device_node *root = of_find_node_by_path("/");
>         const struct of_device_id *match;
>
>         match = of_match_node(exynos_cpufreq_matches, root);
>         if (!match) {
>                 platform_device_register_simple("exynos-cpufreq", -1,
>                                                 NULL, 0);
>                 return;
>         }
>
>         platform_device_register_simple(match->data, -1, NULL, 0);
> }
>
> This way it is much more readable and original behavior is preserved for
> any SoCs not supported by new drivers.

Thanks for the suggestion Tomasz.

>
> Best regards,
> Tomasz
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pm" in
> the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html