Re: [PATCH 2/2] cpufreq: cpu0: Extend support beyond CPU0

From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
To: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
	Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@linaro.org>,
	Lists linaro-kernel <linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org>,
	"linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Arvind Chauhan <arvind.chauhan@arm.com>,
	Mike Turquette <mturquette@linaro.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, Sachin Kamat <spk.linux@gmail.com>,
	Thomas P Abraham <thomas.ab@samsung.com>,
	Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com>, Tomasz Figa <t.figa@samsung.com>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
	Mark Rutland <Mark.Rutland@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] cpufreq: cpu0: Extend support beyond CPU0
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2014 16:22:46 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAKohpo=Q7eWNwcK6KF9_U-zD0g=96QHW9hiQupLpV5GqoWE+mA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <53AB1CC1.4010907@codeaurora.org>

On 26 June 2014 00:32, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org> wrote:
> I don't think this driver should be using regulator_get_optional() (Mark
> B. please correct me if I'm wrong). I doubt a supply is actually
> optional for CPUs, just some DTs aren't specifying them. In those cases,
> the regulator core will insert a dummy supply and the code will work
> without having to check for probe defer and error pointers.

Hi Stephen,

Thanks for your comments.

Leaving the above one, I have tried to fix all you mentioned. And it surely
looks much better now.

I would like to wait for a day or two before sending V2, as people might
be reviewing it and the above issue is still wide open..

But in case you wanna test it (completely changed I must say, but
for good), its here:

git://git.linaro.org/people/viresh.kumar/linux.git cpufreq/cpu0-krait-v2

Let me know if you still find it childish :)