Re: [PATCH 00/14] cpufreq: cpu0: Extend support beyond CPU0, V2

[Viresh Kumar]

On 25 July 2014 19:59, Rob Herring <robherring2@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> A temporary solution would have to be NOT in DT because once you add
> something into DT you are stuck with it for some time. You could

I agree..

> simply support independent clocks by looking at the platform type, but
> that is still risky since you may want to define the OPP in DT
> differently for the 2 cases.

Or because we are going to create platform devices for now, lets have
some platform data for cpufreq-cpu0 ?

> The other problem with temporary solutions is once they are accepted,
> people loose motivation to create the permanent solution. "Can you
> take this now and I'll fix the issues later" is a red flag to
> maintainers.

I completely agree, but there are few points here which might make the red
flag yellow if not green :)
- I co-maintain this framework and so I do care about it :)
- Even with the temporary stuff the solution wouldn't be complete for platforms
with multiple clusters having separate clock lines.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/