[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAKohpon63d40c8eGKqY9EHZhb18ipKHhvBffo=buLLpP=CP0rA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2013 11:37:45 +0530
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To: Hans-Christian Egtvedt <egtvedt@...fundet.no>
Cc: rjw@...k.pl, linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org, patches@...aro.org,
cpufreq@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/44] cpufreq: at32ap: Use generic cpufreq routines
On 10 August 2013 13:53, Hans-Christian Egtvedt <egtvedt@...fundet.no> wrote:
> Around Sat 10 Aug 2013 12:14:07 +0530 or thereabout, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>> Most of the CPUFreq drivers do similar things in .exit() and .verify() routines
>> and .attr. So its better if we have generic routines for them which can be used
>> by cpufreq drivers then.
>>
>> This patch uses these generic routines for this driver.
>
> Nice, thanks for cleaning up (-:
>
>> Cc: Hans-Christian Egtvedt <egtvedt@...fundet.no>
>> Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
>
> Acked-by: Hans-Christian Egtvedt <egtvedt@...fundet.no>
Thanks for your Ack but I have to NACK it :)
My patch was wrong.. It was based on the assumption that everybody who
had implemented a .target() also implements a frequency table and exposes
it.. And the generic routines I have exposed depend on that frequency table.
And this cpufreq driver doesn't expose that freq table...
And so this patch is dropped :(
--
viresh
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists