On Wed, 16 Oct 2013, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha wrote:
> From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha <sudeep.karkadanagesha@xxxxxxx>
>
> This patch adds vexpress-spc platform device to enables the vexpress
> SPC cpufreq interface driver.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha <sudeep.karkadanagesha@xxxxxxx>
> Cc: Pawel Moll <Pawel.Moll@xxxxxxx>
> Cc: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> arch/arm/mach-vexpress/spc.c | 2 ++
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-vexpress/spc.c b/arch/arm/mach-vexpress/spc.c
> index a8b8310..4ddfbfe 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-vexpress/spc.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-vexpress/spc.c
> @@ -25,6 +25,7 @@
> #include <linux/interrupt.h>
> #include <linux/io.h>
> #include <linux/opp.h>
> +#include <linux/platform_device.h>
> #include <linux/slab.h>
> #include <linux/semaphore.h>
>
> @@ -532,6 +533,7 @@ static int __init ve_spc_clk_init(void)
> pr_warn("failed to initialise cpu%d opp table\n", cpu);
> }
>
> + platform_device_register_simple("vexpress-spc-cpufreq", -1, NULL, 0);
> return 0;
> }
> module_init(ve_spc_clk_init);
OK... this solves my concern about initcall ordering. Please just
disregard my suggestions on patch #3. I'd suggest folding this patch
into patch 3/5 though.
Nicolas
--
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
