* Tero Kristo <t-kristo@xxxxxx> [150714 03:34]: > On 07/14/2015 12:54 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote: > >* Tero Kristo <t-kristo@xxxxxx> [150714 01:56]: > >> > >>This pull request contains the TI clock driver set to move the clock > >>implementations under clock driver. Some small portions of the clock driver > >>code still remain under mach-omap2 after this, it should be decided whether > >>this code is now obsolete and should be deleted or should someone try to fix > >>it. > > > >Hmm care to clarify what is obsolete or broken after this series? > > Not after this series, was broken/obsolete already before. > > A couple of omap2/omap3 specific clock files still remain under mach-omap2, > they are DVFS related. OMAP3 core dvfs support is currently completely > unused (this could probably be removed, or shall we re-introduce the painful > core dvfs at some point again?), and parts of the omap2 core dpll handling > code should probably be re-written; or at least verified that it actually > works properly. I can't test OMAP2 DVFS myself so don't dare to fiddle with > it.... I could probably try to get some sort of DVFS test case to work on > the board farm OMAP2 board I have access to though, I can investigate this. People seem to still want the 1 GiHz support, but I think that only depends on the SmartReflex and some kind of replacement for voltagedomains. So if the core DVFS support is unused, I doubt it's very high on anybody's list right now. > >And I take it's not obsolete or broken because of this series? :) > > No, this series does not touch the above mentioned pieces of code, so this > definitely should not break anything. :) OK thanks for confirming that. Regards, Tony -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
