On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 4:56 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 24-06-15, 16:44, Pi-Cheng Chen wrote:
>> One reason to put those initialization and resource allocation in probe is
>> that it's easier to handle the return value -PROBE_DEFER from clock
>> and regulator framework when trying to get clocks
On 24-06-15, 16:44, Pi-Cheng Chen wrote:
> One reason to put those initialization and resource allocation in probe is
> that it's easier to handle the return value -PROBE_DEFER from clock
> and regulator framework when trying to get clocks and regulators
> consumed by cpufreq driver.
This is the
Hi Viresh,
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 8:57 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 23-06-15, 23:25, Pi-Cheng Chen wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 7:45 PM, Viresh Kumar
>> wrote:
>> >> +static struct mtk_cpu_dvfs_info *mtk_cpu_dvfs_info_get(int cpu)
>> >
>> > A very bad name to a routine with very specific
On 24-06-15, 16:44, Pi-Cheng Chen wrote:
One reason to put those initialization and resource allocation in probe is
that it's easier to handle the return value -PROBE_DEFER from clock
and regulator framework when trying to get clocks and regulators
consumed by cpufreq driver.
This is the
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 4:56 PM, Viresh Kumar viresh.ku...@linaro.org wrote:
On 24-06-15, 16:44, Pi-Cheng Chen wrote:
One reason to put those initialization and resource allocation in probe is
that it's easier to handle the return value -PROBE_DEFER from clock
and regulator framework when
Hi Viresh,
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 8:57 AM, Viresh Kumar viresh.ku...@linaro.org wrote:
On 23-06-15, 23:25, Pi-Cheng Chen wrote:
On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 7:45 PM, Viresh Kumar viresh.ku...@linaro.org
wrote:
+static struct mtk_cpu_dvfs_info *mtk_cpu_dvfs_info_get(int cpu)
A very bad name
On 23-06-15, 23:25, Pi-Cheng Chen wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 7:45 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> >> +static struct mtk_cpu_dvfs_info *mtk_cpu_dvfs_info_get(int cpu)
> >
> > A very bad name to a routine with very specific functionality.
>
> Would get_mtk_cpu_dvfs_info() or
Hi Viresh,
On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 7:45 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 08-06-15, 20:29, Pi-Cheng Chen wrote:
>
> Sorry for the delay, I have been quite busy recently.
That's fine. Thanks for reviewing.
>
>> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/mt8173-cpufreq.c
>> +static LIST_HEAD(cpu_dvfs_info_list);
>> +
>>
Hi Viresh,
On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 7:45 PM, Viresh Kumar viresh.ku...@linaro.org wrote:
On 08-06-15, 20:29, Pi-Cheng Chen wrote:
Sorry for the delay, I have been quite busy recently.
That's fine. Thanks for reviewing.
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/mt8173-cpufreq.c
+static
On 23-06-15, 23:25, Pi-Cheng Chen wrote:
On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 7:45 PM, Viresh Kumar viresh.ku...@linaro.org wrote:
+static struct mtk_cpu_dvfs_info *mtk_cpu_dvfs_info_get(int cpu)
A very bad name to a routine with very specific functionality.
Would get_mtk_cpu_dvfs_info() or
On 08-06-15, 20:29, Pi-Cheng Chen wrote:
Sorry for the delay, I have been quite busy recently.
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/mt8173-cpufreq.c
> +static LIST_HEAD(cpu_dvfs_info_list);
> +
> +static inline struct mtk_cpu_dvfs_info *to_mtk_cpu_dvfs_info(
> + struct list_head *list)
>
On 08-06-15, 20:29, Pi-Cheng Chen wrote:
Sorry for the delay, I have been quite busy recently.
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/mt8173-cpufreq.c
+static LIST_HEAD(cpu_dvfs_info_list);
+
+static inline struct mtk_cpu_dvfs_info *to_mtk_cpu_dvfs_info(
+ struct list_head *list)
+{
+
On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 5:17 PM, Paul Bolle wrote:
> On Mon, 2015-06-08 at 20:29 +0800, Pi-Cheng Chen wrote:
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/mt8173-cpufreq.c
>
>> +#include
>
> Weren't you going to drop this include?
Sorry I forget to merge that part of fix into this patch.
Will fix
On Mon, 2015-06-08 at 20:29 +0800, Pi-Cheng Chen wrote:
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/mt8173-cpufreq.c
> +#include
Weren't you going to drop this include?
> +module_init(mt8173_cpufreq_driver_init);
For built-in code this is equivalent to, speaking from memory:
On Mon, 2015-06-08 at 20:29 +0800, Pi-Cheng Chen wrote:
--- /dev/null
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/mt8173-cpufreq.c
+#include linux/module.h
Weren't you going to drop this include?
+module_init(mt8173_cpufreq_driver_init);
For built-in code this is equivalent to, speaking from memory:
On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 5:17 PM, Paul Bolle pebo...@tiscali.nl wrote:
On Mon, 2015-06-08 at 20:29 +0800, Pi-Cheng Chen wrote:
--- /dev/null
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/mt8173-cpufreq.c
+#include linux/module.h
Weren't you going to drop this include?
Sorry I forget to merge that part of fix into
This patch implements MT8173 cpufreq driver.
Signed-off-by: Pi-Cheng Chen
---
drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm | 7 +
drivers/cpufreq/Makefile | 1 +
drivers/cpufreq/mt8173-cpufreq.c | 550 +++
3 files changed, 558 insertions(+)
create mode
This patch implements MT8173 cpufreq driver.
Signed-off-by: Pi-Cheng Chen pi-cheng.c...@linaro.org
---
drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm | 7 +
drivers/cpufreq/Makefile | 1 +
drivers/cpufreq/mt8173-cpufreq.c | 550 +++
3 files changed, 558
18 matches
Mail list logo
