[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150708111259.GC1805@linux>
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2015 16:42:59 +0530
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To: Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kernel@...inux.com, rjw@...ysocki.net, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, ajitpal.singh@...com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/9] cpufreq: Introduce support for ST's cpufreq
functionality
On 08-07-15, 11:59, Lee Jones wrote:
> No problem. So long as it's still on your radar.
So, for the first 7 patches:
Reviewed-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
but for the last two:
- I thought we agreed that you will have a look at opp-v2 bindings and
create your new bindings as an extension of those ? As we support
extending opp-v2 bindings per vendor basis.
- And I don't really think you need to create a device for your STM
driver, why not move your stm-cpufreq file to arch/arm/- and call it
from .init_late, from where you call init_cpufreq() today. Your
driver doesn't have anything related to cpufreq-core really and
isn't required to stay in drivers/cpufreq, unless you want it that
way.
I haven't reviewed the driver yet and waiting for an answer to opp-v2
question I asked above. opp-v2 is created because we didn't wanted
platforms to create new separate bindings for OPPs :)
--
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