On Friday 19 April 2013, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > 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> Hmm, actually this conflicts heavily with the other Kconfig changes in the cpufreq tree. Any other idea how to resolve this? Arnd > --- > 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. -- 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
