Re: cpufreq on ARM broken

[Russell King <rmk@arm.linux.org.uk>]

On Wed, Jun 02, 2004 at 02:21:53PM +0200, Dominik Brodowski wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 01, 2004 at 06:11:34PM +0100, Dave Jones wrote:
> > Thoughts ?
> > I've forgotten why we introduced this flag, it appears that this
> > would be the first thing in the tree to actually use it,
> > which makes me sceptical.
> 
> This flag was introduced when I added the "fail if no proper CPU found"
> feature, which is helpful for the ACPI P-States driver and some other x86
> drivers which only check whether they can run on _any_ CPU in the
> cpu-specific initialization call. To assert backwards-compatibility, this
> flag avoids "automatic unregistration" -- I wasn't aware some drivers do
> need this backwards compatibility, but obviously ARM needs it. So Russell's 
> patch looks to be what's needed, from my perspective.

It isn't back-compat.  It's caused by a side effect of how the order of
initialisation.

-- 
Russell King
 Linux kernel    2.6 ARM Linux   - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/
 maintainer of:  2.6 PCMCIA      - http://pcmcia.arm.linux.org.uk/
                 2.6 Serial core