On Saturday, January 6, 2018 4:05:41 AM CET Anson Huang wrote: > Hi, Rafael > > Best Regards! > Anson Huang > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Rafael > > J. Wysocki > > Sent: 2018-01-05 8:21 PM > > To: Anson Huang <[email protected]> > > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; Linux > > PM <[email protected]>; Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux- > > [email protected]>; Shawn Guo <[email protected]>; Sascha Hauer > > <[email protected]>; Fabio Estevam <[email protected]>; Rob > > Herring <[email protected]>; Mark Rutland <[email protected]>; > > Russell King - ARM Linux <[email protected]>; Rafael J. Wysocki > > <[email protected]>; Viresh Kumar <[email protected]>; Jacky Bai > > <[email protected]>; A.s. Dong <[email protected]> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] cpufreq: imx6q: add 696MHz operating point for > > i.mx6ul > > > > On Tue, Jan 2, 2018 at 6:07 PM, Anson Huang <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Add 696MHz operating point for i.MX6UL, only for those parts with > > > speed grading fuse set to 2b'10 supports 696MHz operating point, so, > > > speed grading check is also added for i.MX6UL in this patch, the clock > > > tree for each operating point are as below: > > > > > > 696MHz: > > > pll1 696000000 > > > pll1_bypass 696000000 > > > pll1_sys 696000000 > > > pll1_sw 696000000 > > > arm 696000000 > > > 528MHz: > > > pll2 528000000 > > > pll2_bypass 528000000 > > > pll2_bus 528000000 > > > ca7_secondary_sel 528000000 > > > step 528000000 > > > pll1_sw 528000000 > > > arm 528000000 > > > 396MHz: > > > pll2_pfd2_396m 396000000 > > > ca7_secondary_sel 396000000 > > > step 396000000 > > > pll1_sw 396000000 > > > arm 396000000 > > > 198MHz: > > > pll2_pfd2_396m 396000000 > > > ca7_secondary_sel 396000000 > > > step 396000000 > > > pll1_sw 396000000 > > > arm 198000000 > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Anson Huang <[email protected]> > > > > This doesn't apply for me and in a nontrivial way. > > > > What kernel is it against? > > I did it based on linux-next, it should be on linux-next-pm branch, I redo > the patch set V2 based on linux-next-pm, also redo the test, > sorry for the inconvenience.
But you didn't add the Reviewed-by: tags from Fabio to them. Was that on purpose or by mistake? Thanks, Rafael
