On 2 October 2012 13:45, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 4:16 PM, Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> From: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@xxxxxxxxxx> >> >> Since the cpufreq table is dependant on the prmcu fw, it make sense to >> keep the table there. Moreover since the cpufreq is already a mfd child >> device added by the prcmu this make even more logic. > > Better there than elsewhere. > >> The next step after these patches will be to implement an "arm_clk" to be >> used from cpufreq to update the opp instead of using the prcmu opp API directly. >> This will then remove the last hard dependency to the prcmu API from cpufreq. > > Sounds like a plan. > > Reviewed-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Is this going to be merged through the cpufreq tree or the MFD tree? Good question! Actually I would prefer to go through Mike Turquette clock tree, if he feel it is OK of course. My idea is then get the Ack from Rafael for cpufreq patches and from Samuel for the mfd patches. The reason for doing this in a quite complicated manner is that my soon upcoming clock and mfd patches will functionality wise depend on these patches, and don't want to be sitting around and waiting for a new rc before being able to push the next series. Kind regards Ulf Hansson -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe cpufreq" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
