On 18.05.2018 05:07, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 17-05-18, 21:00, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
>> -static int __init tegra_cpufreq_init(void)
>> +static int tegra20_cpufreq_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>> + struct tegra20_cpufreq_data *data;
>> int err;
>> - if (!of_machine_is_compatible("nvidia,tegra20"))
>> - return -ENODEV;
> So this stuff wasn't really required as you are getting rid of that in
> the same series. Should we really add it then ? Maybe ..
It's not strictly needed, but I'd prefer to keep that stuff for clarity as it
kinda shows the way that led to the final result.