From: Tang Yuantian
Add cpufreq driver for Freescale e500mc, e5500 and e6500 SoCs
which are capable of changing the frequency of CPU dynamically
Signed-off-by: Tang Yuantian
Signed-off-by: Li Yang
---
v2:
- change the per_cpu variable to point type
- fixed other issues
driver
On 28 March 2013 15:25, wrote:
> From: Tang Yuantian
>
> Add cpufreq driver for Freescale e500mc, e5500 and e6500 SoCs
> which are capable of changing the frequency of CPU dynamically
>
> Signed-off-by: Tang Yuantian
> Signed-off-by: Li Yang
> ---
> v2:
> - change the per_cpu variable
> > +static int corenet_cpufreq_cpu_init(struct cpufreq_policy *policy) {
> > + unsigned int cpu = policy->cpu;
> > + struct device_node *np;
> > + int i, count;
> > + struct clk *clk;
> > + struct cpufreq_frequency_table *table;
> > + struct cpu_data *data;
> >
On 29 March 2013 08:21, Tang Yuantian-B29983 wrote:
>> > +static int corenet_cpufreq_cpu_init(struct cpufreq_policy *policy) {
>> > + unsigned int cpu = policy->cpu;
>> > + struct device_node *np;
>> > + int i, count;
>> > + struct clk *clk;
>> > + struct cpufreq_freq
2/2 v2] cpufreq: Add cpufreq driver for Freescale
> e500mc SoCs
>
> On 29 March 2013 08:21, Tang Yuantian-B29983 wrote:
> >> > +static int corenet_cpufreq_cpu_init(struct cpufreq_policy *policy)
> {
> >> > + unsigned int cpu = policy->cpu;
> &
On 29 March 2013 10:17, Tang Yuantian-B29983 wrote:
> I thought it was OK here. Apparently, sizeof(*table) is better.
> But kcalloc is OK.
Yes yes, Kcalloc is okay... I have misread that part earlier when i
suggested kzalloc.
In last mail i was referring to sizeof() only.
