[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3810049.oQlCXiQ5bk@wuerfel>
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2016 17:04:26 +0200
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Cc: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
Rafael Wysocki <rjw@...ysocki.net>, arnd.bergmann@...aro.org,
Kukjin Kim <kgene@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>,
kgene.kim@...sung.com, heiko@...ech.de, xf@...k-chips.com,
mmcclint@...eaurora.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org,
linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 3/3] cpufreq: exynos: Use generic platdev driver
On Tuesday 29 March 2016 12:09:49 Viresh Kumar wrote:
> -static void __init exynos_cpufreq_init(void)
> -{
> - struct device_node *root = of_find_node_by_path("/");
> - const struct of_device_id *match;
> -
> - match = of_match_node(exynos_cpufreq_matches, root);
> - if (!match) {
> - platform_device_register_simple("exynos-cpufreq", -1, NULL, 0);
> - return;
> - }
> -
> - platform_device_register_simple(match->data, -1, NULL, 0);
> -}
How is the "exynos-cpufreq" case handled now? Is that no longer used now?
I assume the patch is correct based on Krzysztof's review, but it might be
good to explain this better.
Arnd
Powered by blists - more mailing lists