On 12/4/18 7:22 PM, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
On 04.12.2018 12:25, Joseph Lo wrote:
Tegra210 uses the same methodology as Tegra124 for CPUFreq controlling
that based on DFLL clock. So extending this driver to support Tegra210.
Cc: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Signed-off-by: Joseph Lo <josephl@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/cpufreq/tegra124-cpufreq.c | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/tegra124-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/tegra124-cpufreq.c
index 448d00763d00..1af955fb715c 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/tegra124-cpufreq.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/tegra124-cpufreq.c
@@ -159,7 +159,8 @@ static int __init tegra_cpufreq_init(void)
int ret;
struct platform_device *pdev;
- if (!of_machine_is_compatible("nvidia,tegra124"))
+ if (!(of_machine_is_compatible("nvidia,tegra124") ||
+ of_machine_is_compatible("nvidia,tegra210")))
return -ENODEV;
/*
Seems that's not enough, you also need to blacklist "nvidia,tegra210" in the drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt-platdev.c
Hi Dmitry,
Thanks for reviewing. Actually it's "just" enough, I did check that
driver for creating device data for cpufreq-dt driver. It needs to have
both OPP v2 property and blacklist to create device data.
Because we don't use OPP v2, it will never be true. So it will "just"
work in this case.
But you are right, add that to blacklist is more clear. I can add one
more patch for that in next series.
Thanks,
Joseph
