Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752358AbaF0CP6 (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Jun 2014 22:15:58 -0400 Received: from mail-ob0-f179.google.com ([209.85.214.179]:43184 "EHLO mail-ob0-f179.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751139AbaF0CP4 (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Jun 2014 22:15:56 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20140627015354.32686.83046@quantum> References: <53AB1CC1.4010907@codeaurora.org> <53ACB568.4000903@codeaurora.org> <20140627015354.32686.83046@quantum> Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2014 07:45:55 +0530 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] cpufreq: cpu0: Extend support beyond CPU0 From: Viresh Kumar To: Mike Turquette Cc: Stephen Boyd , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Shawn Guo , Lists linaro-kernel , "linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Arvind Chauhan , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, Sachin Kamat , Thomas P Abraham , Nishanth Menon , Tomasz Figa , Mark Brown , Mark Rutland Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 27 June 2014 07:23, Mike Turquette wrote: >> but it isn't future-proof if/when the clock framework starts returning >> dynamically allocated clock pointers for each clk_get() invocation. >> Maybe we need a function in the common clock framework that tells us if >> the clocks are the same either via DT or by taking two clock pointers? > > I looked through the patch briefly and did not see why we would need to > do this. Any hint? We want to know which CPUs are sharing clock line, so that we can fill affected-cpus field of cpufreq core. -- 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/