On 25 July 2014 19:59, Rob Herring <robherring2@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > A temporary solution would have to be NOT in DT because once you add > something into DT you are stuck with it for some time. You could I agree.. > simply support independent clocks by looking at the platform type, but > that is still risky since you may want to define the OPP in DT > differently for the 2 cases. Or because we are going to create platform devices for now, lets have some platform data for cpufreq-cpu0 ? > The other problem with temporary solutions is once they are accepted, > people loose motivation to create the permanent solution. "Can you > take this now and I'll fix the issues later" is a red flag to > maintainers. I completely agree, but there are few points here which might make the red flag yellow if not green :) - I co-maintain this framework and so I do care about it :) - Even with the temporary stuff the solution wouldn't be complete for platforms with multiple clusters having separate clock lines. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
