[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130914093125.GE23705@lunn.ch>
Date: Sat, 14 Sep 2013 11:31:25 +0200
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
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, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 069/228] cpufreq: kirkwood: Use generic cpufreq routines
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 06:30:15PM +0530, 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.
>
> Cc: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
> Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
> ---
> drivers/cpufreq/kirkwood-cpufreq.c | 22 +++-------------------
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
Hi Viresh
You can add:
Tested-by: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
to
[PATCH 069/228] cpufreq: kirkwood: Use generic cpufreq routines
[PATCH 107/228] cpufreq: kirkwood: don't initialize part of policy that is set by core
[PATCH 161/228] cpufreq: kirkwood: Convert to light weight ->target_index() routine
[PATCH 195/228] cpufreq: kirkwood: remove calls to cpufreq_notify_transition()
It does however require the patch:
http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg273378.html
but this is not because of this patch series, it was already broken.
Thanks
Andrew
--
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