I get it, thanks. ? 2016/3/21 23:52, Heiko St?bner ??: > Am Montag, 21. M?rz 2016, 16:13:40 schrieb Heiko St?bner: >> Hi, >> >> Am Montag, 21. M?rz 2016, 21:24:32 schrieb Feng Xiao: >>> ? 2016/3/21 17:58, Viresh Kumar ??: >>>> On 21-03-16, 10:54, Heiko St?bner wrote: >>>>> I hadn't seen that yet ... nice that cpufreq-dt now also supports >>>>> clusters :-) >>>>> >>>>> The other part still stands though, as we probably should register the >>>>> platform-device somewhere else and not in some new special module. >>>>> >>>>> When everything is using cpufreq-dt now, I guess we could just add it >>>>> to >>>>> the core rockchip clk-code. Or was there some agreement where this >>>>> should be done (obviously not the devicetree itself)? >>> Of_clk_init is called early, and platform_device_register_simple should >>> be called after devices_init, it will be failed to do it from clk-code. >>> So we need add a new file or add module_init to each clock controller >>> driver(like clk-rk3368.c, clk-rk3399.c) ? >> as Viresh said, it should be ok to do it like your approach creating a >> module in drivers/cpufreq. But the compatible check is necessary. >> >> Doing it this way also makes it easier to have > Seem like I forgot the complete my sentence here. This should've been > > Doing it this way also makes it easier to have everything go into cpufreq-dt > once that whitelist appears that Viresh wrote about. So this might be better > than to distribute this stuff around other subsystems, as I originally > suggested. > >>>> Yeah, there was a discussion around creating a white or black list of >>>> platforms that want to create a platform device for cpufreq-dt. That can >>>> be done in cpufreq-dt.c or a new file, but I haven't worked out on that >>>> yet. >>>> >>>> You can do it from clk-code or from the driver that was added in this >>>> thread. Just that you need to match your platform's compatible string >>>> before doing that. >>> Rockchip-cpufreq.c depends on ARM_ROCKCHIP_CPUFREQ, it will not be >>> compiled on non-Rockchip platforms. >>> The driver can support all Rockchip SoCs up to now, add >>> of_machine_is_compatible may be redundant ? >> Please always keep multiplatform in mind. These days the kernel can be >> compiled for multiple architectures at the same time, so you can have >> support for Rockchip, Exynos, Qualcom and whatever in the same kernel >> image. >> >> Therefore a compile-time check is not enough and you need to check the >> actually running machine as well. >> >> >> Heiko > > >
