On 18-05-18, 11:09, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
> 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.
Okay.
--
viresh
