linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] cpufreq: tegra124: Allow building as a module

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: <20250519103749.falgd64ikkwkfpg7@vireshk-i7>
Date: Mon, 19 May 2025 16:07:49 +0530
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To: Jon Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>
Cc: Aaron Kling <webgeek1234@...il.com>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
	Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] cpufreq: tegra124: Allow building as a module

On 15-05-25, 07:41, Jon Hunter wrote:
> Yes and that is understood. I see a few drivers calling ...
> 
>  platform_device_register_simple("cpufreq-dt", -1, NULL, 0);
> 
> One option, and I don't know if this would be acceptable, would be to add a
> new wrapper function in the cpufreq-dt driver for the above that other
> drivers could call and that would create the dependency you need.

Doing that won't be a problem, but I doubt if that is a better than
adding a soft dependency here. I personally felt that the soft
dependency may be the right way here. The cpufreq-dt file presents a
driver, a device can be added from any file and that doesn't require
the driver file to be inserted first. If the platform wants to
simplify and create a dependency, a soft dependency looks okay.

-- 
viresh