On 26 July 2013 16:56, Lukasz Majewski <l.majewski@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 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.
I don't see how that reasoning fit here.
This is exynos code and you must use exynos specific boost Kconfig
option here.. Otherwise It might be enabled without Exynos specific option,
if somebody else has selected CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_BOOST_SW in
a multi platform kernel,
--
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
