[PATCH RFC] Add cpufreq support

Viresh Kumar viresh.kumar at linaro.org
Mon Feb 8 04:41:27 PST 2016


On 08-02-16, 13:34, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> Maybe add a opp-v3 compatible string?

How will that help?

The problem was that the compatibility string of "opp-v2" specifies
the way we need to parse the bindings and shouldn't be (ab)used to
probe a driver like cpufreq-dt. And so we got stuck.

> I really don't care what you
> match on, as long we don't need any code in arch/arm/ to create a
> device we don't need.

Sure.

> Don't add the device to DT, we really don't want that.

I agree.

> If there
> is too much opposition to looking at the cpus nodes in the initcall,

I didn't get this one, what can we do by looking at CPUs nodes ?

> start with a whitelist for known machines, that at least keeps the
> existing behavior.

That can be a valid solution I would say, but that separate driver
(cpufreq-dt-device.c) needs to be changed for every new platform.

-- 
viresh



More information about the linux-arm-kernel mailing list