[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