[PATCH v3 5/5] cpufreq: qoriq: Don't look at clock implementation details

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Tuesday, September 22, 2015 12:46:54 PM Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 19-09-15, 23:29, Scott Wood wrote:
> > Get the CPU clock's potential parent clocks from the clock interface
> > itself, rather than manually parsing the clocks property to find a
> > phandle, looking at the clock-names property of that, and assuming that
> > those are valid parent clocks for the cpu clock.
> > 
> > This is necessary now that the clocks are generated based on the clock
> > driver's knowledge of the chip rather than a fragile device-tree
> > description of the mux options.
> > 
> > We can now rely on the clock driver to ensure that the mux only exposes
> > options that are valid.  The cpufreq driver was currently being overly
> > conservative in some cases -- for example, the "min_cpufreq =
> > get_bus_freq()" restriction only applies to chips with erratum
> > A-004510, and whether the freq_mask used on p5020 is needed depends on
> > the actual frequencies of the PLLs (FWIW, p5040 has a similar
> > limitation but its .freq_mask was zero) -- and the frequency mask
> > mechanism made assumptions about particular parent clock indices that
> > are no longer valid.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Scott Wood <scottwood at freescale.com>
> > ---
> > v3: was patch 1/5 and patch 4/5, plus blacklist e6500 and changes
> > to clk api usage
> > 
> >  drivers/cpufreq/qoriq-cpufreq.c | 137 ++++++++++++----------------------------
> >  1 file changed, 40 insertions(+), 97 deletions(-)
> 
> Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar at linaro.org>

I'm wondering who's supposed to be merging this set?

Rafael