[PATCH RESEND 0/5] arm: sa1100: add cpu clock for fbdev and pcmcia

Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov dbaryshkov at gmail.com
Fri Nov 14 05:05:48 PST 2014

Dear Russell,

2014-11-06 10:41 GMT+03:00 Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov <dbaryshkov at gmail.com>:
> These patches are required to make SL-5500 (collie) to work properly.
> Framebuffer maintainer added his ack to the respective patch. PCMCIA
> subsystem seems to be unmaintained at this moment. Russell, could you
> please review and hopefully ack these patches?
> On SA-1100 framebuffer and PCMCIA drivers make use of cpufreq_get(0)
> function call to determine the cpu frequency. Russell's commit
> 1937f5b91833e2e8e53bcc821fc7a5fbe6ccb9b5 (ARM: fix sa1100 build) fixed
> the build issues, but broke two devices (Collie and Jornada720). For
> those two boards the cpufreq code gets compiled but is not enabled (as
> board files do not provide timing information for the CPUFREQ driver).
> Thus cpufreq_get(0) returns incorrect value and incorrect timings get
> programmed into the hardware.
> PXA2xx (the very similar platform) uses Clock API to determine CPU
> frequency both in framebuffer and PCMCIA drivers. These patches make
> similar changes to StrongARM drivers.

We can continue to carry over this patch set in local tree. Having a grave bug
in upstream kernels. What is the purpose of upstream kernel then? Why did
we have so many talks about bad practice of 'vendor/local/private' Linux trees?

Do you see anything wrong with this patchset? Why do you keep on ignoring it?
Did you stop caring about sa11x0?

With best wishes

More information about the linux-pcmcia mailing list