On 10/19, Robert Jarzmik wrote: > Stephen Boyd <sb...@codeaurora.org> writes: > > > On 10/18, Robert Jarzmik wrote: > >> Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarz...@free.fr> writes: > >> Hi Michael and Stephen, > >> > >> I'm planing on sending a v2 next week with minor corrections, mostly in > >> the data > >> tables (pxa25x_freqs and pxa27x_freqs), as testing prooved some values > >> were wrong. > >> > >> If you want me modify this serie, will you have time to review for next > >> week or > >> should I delay the v2 posting ? > >> > > > > No need to delay. clk patches look fine with a quick glance. It > > would be really neat if we could make cpufreq-dt work without DT. > > What's blocking that? OPP tables? > > Heu I'm not the author of cpufreq-dt, so I'm not the best to answer. > To answer the question "without DT", it depends if you mean "with ACPI" or > "with > platform_data" or something else.
I mean platform_data mostly. Do you use ACPI with the clk driver? > > From what I've seen so far, the missing/blocking points are : > - the OPP points definition as you said Hm.. I thought cpufreq-dt worked with OPP tables populated by other code (i.e. platform code). > - probably same thing for the input power supply / regulator Regulators should be optional I hope. Do you use regulators in your design that has platform_data? > - the cooling parts probably > - and more generaly all the cpufreq-dt is built around device-tree > - last point, the name from KConfig, "Generic DT based cpufreq driver" > => that strongly suggest it's device-tree only > > I'm deeply convinced that Viresh being one of the authors will shed more light > on this. Sure, thanks for the notes. -- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
