On Wednesday 03 of October 2012 12:12:05 Ulf Hansson wrote: > 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. The cpufreq patches look good to me, please feel free to tag them as ACKed by me. Thanks, Rafael -- I speak only for myself. Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center. -- 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
