linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] cpufreq: rcar: Add support for R8A7795 SoC

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 10 May 2016 13:49:07 +0530
From:	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To:	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
Cc:	Khiem Nguyen <khiem.nguyen.xt@....renesas.com>,
	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
	Simon Horman <horms+renesas@...ge.net.au>,
	Magnus Damm <damm+renesas@...nsource.se>,
	Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>,
	"linux-clk@...r.kernel.org" <linux-clk@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org" 
	<linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
	Toru Oishi <toru.oishi.zj@....renesas.com>,
	"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] cpufreq: rcar: Add support for R8A7795 SoC

On 10-05-16, 10:17, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Viresh,
> 
> On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 7:07 AM, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org> wrote:
> > On 10-05-16, 11:57, Khiem Nguyen wrote:
> >> After the commit "a399dc9fc50 cpufreq: shmobile: Use generic platdev
> >> driver", will use cpufreq-dt-platdev driver to enable cpufreq-dt support.
> >> Hence, follow the implementation to support new R8A7795 SoC.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Khiem Nguyen <khiem.nguyen.xt@....renesas.com>
> >> ---
> >>  drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt-platdev.c | 1 +
> >>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> >
> > Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
> 
> Quoting Viresh when this file was introduced:
> | This is going to be done once per boot and this shouldn't hurt. And for new
> | platforms we may do things differently as they are going to use
> opp-v2 bindings.
> 
> As r8a7795/r8a7796 are not arm32 "shmobile", but arm64, perhaps we should
> use this new "opp-v2" binding instead? Has it been finalized?

Yeah, that would be preferred.

-- 
viresh