On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 10:34:29AM +0530, Shilimkar, Santosh wrote: > On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 9:20 PM, Turquette, Mike <mturque...@ti.com> wrote: > > How about cpufreq-single-thread.c and CONFIG_CPUFREQ_SINGLE_THREAD? > > That makes sense for both UP and SMP. > > > Indeed. This sounds more appropriate and also reflects what actually happens > with a UP or shared clock SMP case. > While I agree with this observation, the suggested naming does not reflect the rationale of CPU0 though, which is really important for driver to work, and is exactly the thing I like about *_CPU0 naming.
The driver needs the following stuff around CPU0 to be functional. - Device tree node /cpus/cpu@0 - clk lookup with dev_id being "cpu0" - regulator with id being "cpu0" I think the *_CPU0 naming does a better job on emphasising those in the first place. -- Regards, Shawn _______________________________________________ devicetree-discuss mailing list devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/devicetree-discuss
