On Fri, 28 Nov 2014 13:35:49 +0530
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 27 November 2014 at 19:42, Eduardo Valentin <edubezval@xxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
> > (I'm sorry VireshK, I am still using my normal practice) :-)
>
> That's fine :)
>
> > diff --git a/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c
> > b/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c index 1ab0018..bed3fa2 100644
> > --- a/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c
> > +++ b/drivers/thermal/cpu_cooling.c
> > @@ -440,6 +440,11 @@ __cpufreq_cooling_register(struct device_node
> > *np, int ret = 0, i;
> > struct cpufreq_policy policy;
> >
> > + if (!cpufreq_frequency_get_table(0)) {
> > + pr_err("cpu_cooling: cpufreq layer not ready!
> > Deferring.\n");
>
> Throwing an error here doesn't look to be the right thing. Ultimately
> we will register the cooling dev when probed again after some time.
>
> So, a pr_debug() suits more here.
>
> Also, this breaks existing exynos thermal drivers as they don't handle
> -EPROBE_DEFER well right now.
Unfortunately Viresh is correct here. Current (before rework) Exynos
TMU driver expects that cpu_cooling device will succeed.
>
> I reached here, because one of my patches had something similar to
> what you wrote. Just for this file though, haven't updated any other
> drivers though.
>
> Will be sending you my small patchset by end of day today, please see
> if they make any sense at all..
Best regards,
Łukasz Majewski
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
