Of course. W dniu 09.01.2017 o 10:58, Sudeep Holla pisze: > > > On 07/01/17 00:44, Michał Zegan wrote: >> seems the patch works as intended. >> > > So, can we take this as > Tested-by: Michał Zegan <[email protected]> ? > >> W dniu 06.01.2017 o 13:34, Sudeep Holla pisze: >>> Currently we add the virtual cpufreq device unconditionally even when >>> the SCPI DVFS clock provider node is disabled. This will cause cpufreq >>> driver to throw errors when it gets initailised on boot/modprobe and >>> also when the CPUs are hot-plugged back in. >>> >>> This patch fixes the issue by adding the virtual cpufreq device only if >>> the SCPI DVFS clock provider is available and registered. >>> >>> Fixes: 9490f01e2471 ("clk: scpi: add support for cpufreq virtual device") >>> Reported-by: Michał Zegan <[email protected]> >>> Cc: Neil Armstrong <[email protected]> >>> Cc: Michael Turquette <[email protected]> >>> Cc: Stephen Boyd <[email protected]> >>> Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <[email protected]> >
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
