Commit 6e6aac7590 "ARM: EXYNOS: Migrate clock support to common clock framework" broke support for the exynos cpufreq drivers. While we're waiting for a fix for this, let's get back to a state where the kernel builds again with the cpufreq subsystem enabled but ARM_EXYNOS_CPUFREQ disabled. I assume that this was the intention behind this Kconfig symbol anyway. Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> Cc: Sylwester Nawrocki <s.nawrocki@xxxxxxxxxxx> Cc: Tomasz Figa <t.figa@xxxxxxxxxxx> Cc: Thomas Abraham <thomas.abraham@xxxxxxxxxx> Cc: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@xxxxxxxxxxx> Cc: cpufreq@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> --- Rafael, I'm putting this patch into the arm-soc tree now to avoid a bug based on a patch that I got from Kukjin. If you have any objections, please let me know so I can revert it again. Everyone else: Why does 6e6aac7590 have your "Tested-by" and "Signed-off-by" tags on it when it's obviously broken? Who is fixing this? Having no working exynos cpufreq support in 3.10 would be a serious regression. diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm index 030ddf6..2b8862d 100644 --- a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm @@ -61,18 +61,21 @@ config ARM_EXYNOS_CPUFREQ config ARM_EXYNOS4210_CPUFREQ def_bool CPU_EXYNOS4210 + depends on ARM_EXYNOS_CPUFREQ help This adds the CPUFreq driver for Samsung EXYNOS4210 SoC (S5PV310 or S5PC210). config ARM_EXYNOS4X12_CPUFREQ def_bool (SOC_EXYNOS4212 || SOC_EXYNOS4412) + depends on ARM_EXYNOS_CPUFREQ help This adds the CPUFreq driver for Samsung EXYNOS4X12 SoC (EXYNOS4212 or EXYNOS4412). config ARM_EXYNOS5250_CPUFREQ def_bool SOC_EXYNOS5250 + depends on ARM_EXYNOS_CPUFREQ help This adds the CPUFreq driver for Samsung EXYNOS5250 SoC. -- 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
