Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755559Ab3CLOnn (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Mar 2013 10:43:43 -0400 Received: from comal.ext.ti.com ([198.47.26.152]:35708 "EHLO comal.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755196Ab3CLOnl (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Mar 2013 10:43:41 -0400 Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2013 09:43:34 -0500 From: Nishanth Menon To: Benoit Cousson CC: Santosh Shilimkar , , "devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org" , , cpufreq , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] cpufreq: cpufreq-cpu0: provide compatibility string for DT matchup Message-ID: <20130312144334.GB21599@kahuna> References: <1363043130-30270-1-git-send-email-nm@ti.com> <1363043130-30270-3-git-send-email-nm@ti.com> <513EB7FE.1070000@ti.com> <513F3B98.6050909@ti.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <513F3B98.6050909@ti.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2172 Lines: 55 On 15:28-20130312, Benoit Cousson wrote: > On 03/12/2013 06:07 AM, Santosh Shilimkar wrote: > > On Tuesday 12 March 2013 04:35 AM, Nishanth Menon wrote: > >> commit 5553f9e (cpufreq: instantiate cpufreq-cpu0 as a platform_driver) > >> now forces platform device to be registered for allowing cpufreq-cpu0 > >> to be used by SoCs. example: drivers/cpufreq/highbank-cpufreq.c > >> > >> However, for SoCs that wish to link up using device tree, instead > >> of platform device, provide compatibility string match: > >> compatible = "cpufreq,cpu0"; > > You cannot add a non-HW relative binding... DT is supposed to represent > the pure HW. > AFAIK, cpufreq has nothing to do with the HW definition. Ref: https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/drivers/cpufreq/highbank-cpufreq.c#n61 there is a need for a device of some sort. in the example above, we register a dummy device for linking up with cpufreq-cpu0 driver. what we do in this patch is to indicate that SoC CPUs are managed by cpufreq-cpu0 driver. I am a bit curious to see how else would we represent drivers to manage real h/w devices like CPU? Is the highbank style the recommended way to do things? > > >> > >> Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" > >> Cc: Santosh Shilimkar > >> Cc: Shawn Guo > >> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > >> Cc: cpufreq@vger.kernel.org > >> Cc: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org > >> Cc: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Nishanth Menon > >> --- > >> .../devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-cpu0.txt | 3 +++ > >> drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-cpu0.c | 6 ++++++ > >> 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+) > >> > > Looks fine to me. CC'ing dt list in case some one has > > comments on binding updates. > > > > Acked-by: Santosh Shilimkar > > Not-Acked-by-me. -- Regards, Nishanth Menon -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/