On Fri, 26 Jul 2013 15:56:53 +0530 Viresh Kumar wrote,
> On 25 July 2013 22:03, Lukasz Majewski <l.majewski@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c
> > b/drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c index 9ae1871..175172d9 100644
> > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c
> > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c
> > @@ -270,6 +270,9 @@ static int exynos_cpufreq_cpu_exit(struct
> > cpufreq_policy *policy)
> >
> > static struct freq_attr *exynos_cpufreq_attr[] = {
> > &cpufreq_freq_attr_scaling_available_freqs,
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_BOOST_SW
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ [*]
>
> Use ARM_EXYNOS_CPU_FREQ_BOOST_SW instead.
For the reasons explained at [PATCH v6 5/8] I would prefer to leave [*]
here.
>
> > + &cpufreq_freq_attr_scaling_boost_freqs,
> > +#endif
> > NULL,
> > };
> >
> > @@ -332,6 +335,9 @@ static int __init exynos_cpufreq_probe(struct
> > platform_device *pdev)
> >
> > locking_frequency = exynos_getspeed(0);
> >
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_BOOST_SW
> > + exynos_driver.boost_supported = true;
> > +#endif
>
> So, why here and not in the definition of exynos_driver?
Right. I will move this to struct cpufreq_driver exynos_driver.
>
> > register_pm_notifier(&exynos_cpufreq_nb);
> >
> > if (cpufreq_register_driver(&exynos_driver)) {
> > --
> > 1.7.10.4
> >
--
Best regards,
Lukasz Majewski
Samsung R&D Institute Poland (SRPOL) | Linux Platform Group
--
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
