linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 14/16] cpufreq: Add cpufreq driver for Tegra124

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

Message-ID: <20140723065412.GA15759@ulmo.nvidia.com>
Date:	Wed, 23 Jul 2014 08:54:13 +0200
From:	Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>
To:	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
Cc:	Tuomas Tynkkynen <ttynkkynen@...dia.com>,
	"linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org" <linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
	Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>,
	Peter De Schrijver <pdeschrijver@...dia.com>,
	Prashant Gaikwad <pgaikwad@...dia.com>,
	Mike Turquette <mturquette@...aro.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
	Paul Walmsley <pwalmsley@...dia.com>,
	"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 14/16] cpufreq: Add cpufreq driver for Tegra124

On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 10:14:44AM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 21 July 2014 21:09, Tuomas Tynkkynen <ttynkkynen@...dia.com> wrote:
> 
> > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm
> > index 7364a53..df3c73e 100644
> > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm
> > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm
> > @@ -244,6 +244,7 @@ config ARM_SPEAR_CPUFREQ
> >  config ARM_TEGRA_CPUFREQ
> >         bool "TEGRA CPUFreq support"
> >         depends on ARCH_TEGRA
> > +       depends on GENERIC_CPUFREQ_CPU0
> 
> Wouldn't this also disturb the existing cpufreq driver for earlier
> tegra platforms? i.e. we don't need cpufreq-cpu0 for them
> atleast as of now.

Perhaps this should be "select" rather than "depends on"?

> > +static int tegra124_cpufreq_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > +{
> > +       int ret;
> > +
> > +       cpu_dev = get_cpu_device(0);
> > +       if (!cpu_dev)
> > +               return -ENODEV;
> > +
> 
> Shouldn't we do a of_node_get() here?

I think this would need to be get_device() since it's the struct device
that's being used subsequently.

Thierry

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped