Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On 03-12-15, 11:26, Ben Gamari wrote: >> Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> > But, before I start reviewing this series, I have few comments. >> > - We weren't able to use cpufreq-dt driver for big LITTLE platforms >> > earlier, as it never had multi cluster support and we wanted >> > clock-sharing information via DT. >> >> Fair enough. >> >> > - That is all fixed now. >> >> I did not see any mention of this in the cpufreq-dt driver binding >> documentation, otherwise I would have tried going this route. >> >> Do you have any references? I'd be happy to examine what would be >> necessary to go this route although, being an independent contributor, >> it may take time. > > You wouldn't find in cpufreq-dt documentation as its not specific to > that. I have seen you DT patches now, and you have created the OPP > tables mostly correctly. Just create the cpufreq-platform device for > cpufreq-dt instead of arm-big-little one. And it should just work. > Do you mean something along these lines? [1] >> Sounds reasonable to me. However, I'd just like to reiterate that this >> line of work can be pursued independently from the upstreaming of this >> series. > > I think this is the right time to upstream the right solution. Just > try it once, if you face lots of difficulties or issues, then we can > ofcourse see.. > Sure. I didn't realize things were so close to being functional. Thanks for the hint. I'll give it a shot next time my XU4 is free. > NOTE: Check how OPP nodes are required to be created now in > linux-next. They should be named like opp@<freq-hz>. Something I > noticed in your DTs. > I've fixed this in the branch. Thanks again. Cheers, - Ben [1] https://github.com/bgamari/linux/commit/285778aaff464d4dcf152f3e9e0df3d8c6909576
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
