On 22-10-18, 14:29, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
> On 10/22/18 8:36 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > On 21-10-18, 23:54, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
> >> Voltage regulators may be not available on some variations of HW, allow to
> >> request stub voltage regulators by OPP core in a such case to reduce code
> >> churning within drivers.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@xxxxxxxxx>
> >> ---
> >> drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt.c | 2 +-
> >> drivers/cpufreq/ti-cpufreq.c | 3 ++-
> >> drivers/opp/core.c | 9 +++++++--
> >> include/linux/pm_opp.h | 4 ++--
> >> 4 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt.c
> >> index e58bfcb1169e..6ebca472ec76 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt.c
> >> @@ -196,7 +196,7 @@ static int cpufreq_init(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
> >> */
> >> name = find_supply_name(cpu_dev);
> >> if (name) {
> >> - opp_table = dev_pm_opp_set_regulators(cpu_dev, &name, 1);
> >> + opp_table = dev_pm_opp_set_regulators(cpu_dev, &name, 1, false);
> >> if (IS_ERR(opp_table)) {
> >> ret = PTR_ERR(opp_table);
> >> dev_err(cpu_dev, "Failed to set regulator for cpu%d: %d\n",
> >
> > Have you actually tested this stuff ? The cpufreq-dt driver will
> > probably fail to probe if the CPU node has a "-supply" property, but
> > no regulator matching that.
> >
>
> Please notice that this patch doesn't change the original behaviour
> and I suppose that failing in a case of missing regulator is the
> expected behaviour for cpufreq-dt. Hence can't see any problem here.
So why have this patch then ?
--
viresh
