On 10/22/18 8:36 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 21-10-18, 23:54, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
>> Voltage regulators may be not available on some variations of HW, allow to
>> request stub voltage regulators by OPP core in a such case to reduce code
>> churning within drivers.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Osipenko <dig...@gmail.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt.c | 2 +-
>> drivers/cpufreq/ti-cpufreq.c | 3 ++-
>> drivers/opp/core.c | 9 +++++++--
>> include/linux/pm_opp.h | 4 ++--
>> 4 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt.c
>> index e58bfcb1169e..6ebca472ec76 100644
>> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt.c
>> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt.c
>> @@ -196,7 +196,7 @@ static int cpufreq_init(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
>> */
>> name = find_supply_name(cpu_dev);
>> if (name) {
>> - opp_table = dev_pm_opp_set_regulators(cpu_dev, &name, 1);
>> + opp_table = dev_pm_opp_set_regulators(cpu_dev, &name, 1, false);
>> if (IS_ERR(opp_table)) {
>> ret = PTR_ERR(opp_table);
>> dev_err(cpu_dev, "Failed to set regulator for cpu%d:
>> %d\n",
>
> Have you actually tested this stuff ? The cpufreq-dt driver will
> probably fail to probe if the CPU node has a "-supply" property, but
> no regulator matching that.
>
Please notice that this patch doesn't change the original behaviour and I
suppose that failing in a case of missing regulator is the expected behaviour
for cpufreq-dt. Hence can't see any problem here.
