linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] cpufreq: ti-cpufreq: Add support for AM3517

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]

Date:   Mon, 9 Sep 2019 13:17:29 -0500
From:   Adam Ford <aford173@...il.com>
To:     "H. Nikolaus Schaller" <hns@...delico.com>
Cc:     Linux-OMAP <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>,
        André Roth <neolynx@...il.com>,
        Discussions about the Letux Kernel 
        <letux-kernel@...nphoenux.org>,
        Andreas Kemnade <andreas@...nade.info>,
        Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>,
        Adam Ford <adam.ford@...icpd.com>,
        Benoît Cousson <bcousson@...libre.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
        devicetree <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-pm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] cpufreq: ti-cpufreq: Add support for AM3517

On Mon, Sep 9, 2019 at 1:13 PM H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@...delico.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Adam,
>
> > Am 09.09.2019 um 17:45 schrieb Adam Ford <aford173@...il.com>:
> >
> > The AM3517 only lists 600MHz @ 1.2V, but the revister values for
>
> a small typo...
>
> s/revister/register/
>
> > 0x4830A204 = 1b86 802f, it seems like am3517 might be a derivative
> > of the omap36 which has OPPs would be OPP50 (300 MHz) and OPP100
> > (600 MHz).
> >
> > This patch simply enable adds the am3517 to the compatible table
> > using the omap3630 structure instead of the 3430.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Adam Ford <aford173@...il.com>
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/ti-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/ti-cpufreq.c
> > index f2f58d689320..6b69fb1d6bdf 100644
> > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/ti-cpufreq.c
> > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/ti-cpufreq.c
> > @@ -270,6 +270,7 @@ static int ti_cpufreq_setup_syscon_register(struct ti_cpufreq_data *opp_data)
> >
> > static const struct of_device_id ti_cpufreq_of_match[] = {
> >       { .compatible = "ti,am33xx", .data = &am3x_soc_data, },
> > +     { .compatible = "ti,am3517", .data = &omap36xx_soc_data, },
> >       { .compatible = "ti,am43", .data = &am4x_soc_data, },
> >       { .compatible = "ti,dra7", .data = &dra7_soc_data },
> >       { .compatible = "ti,omap34xx", .data = &omap34xx_soc_data, },
> > --
> > 2.17.1
> >
>
> Looks good to me.
>
> Should I include your two patches to my patch set (and resend)?
> Or should we keep them separated?

Go ahead and take credit for them.  I just did what you told me to do
and tested them.
Go ahead and mark it as Tested-by with my name.

adam
>
> BR and thanks,
> Nikolaus
>