On 23-04-16, 00:42, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Thursday 21 April 2016 14:29:02 Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-mvebu/pmsu.c b/arch/arm/mach-mvebu/pmsu.c
> > index 79d0a5d9da8e..f24f46776fbb 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm/mach-mvebu/pmsu.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-mvebu/pmsu.c
> > @@ -685,8 +685,6 @@ static int __init armada_xp_pmsu_cpufreq_init(void)
> > dev_err(cpu_dev, "%s: failed to mark OPPs as
> > shared: %d\n",
> > __func__, ret);
> > }
> > -
> > - platform_device_register_simple("cpufreq-dt", -1, NULL, 0);
> > return 0;
> > }
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt-platdev.c
> > b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt-platdev.c
> > index 69b2a222c84e..5704a92c52dc 100644
> > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt-platdev.c
> > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt-platdev.c
> > @@ -33,6 +33,8 @@ static const struct of_device_id machines[] = {
> >
> > { .compatible = "marvell,berlin", },
> >
> > + { .compatible = "marvell,armadaxp", },
> > +
> > { .compatible = "samsung,exynos3250", },
> > { .compatible = "samsung,exynos4210", },
> > { .compatible = "samsung,exynos4212", },
>
> I think to make it clear that the ordering is significant here, I would leave
> this
> platform_device_register_simple() in armada_xp_pmsu_cpufreq_init().
>
> However, it might be helpful to move that function into a new file in
> drivers/cpufreq/ if that works.
We just can't get wrong with the ordering here, as this is done from
device_initcall() and so that point is out of question.
The other thing that can happen is that armada_xp_pmsu_cpufreq_init()
call can fail. In that case, most of the times cpufreq-dt ->init()
will fail as well, so even that is fine for me.
And, so I think we can keep this patch as is.
Do you agree ?
--
viresh
