From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Lunn Subject: Re: [PATCH 069/228] cpufreq: kirkwood: Use generic cpufreq routines Date: Sat, 14 Sep 2013 11:31:25 +0200 Message-ID: <20130914093125.GE23705@lunn.ch> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-pm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Viresh Kumar Cc: rjw@sisk.pl, linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org, patches@linaro.org, cpufreq@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Andrew Lunn On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 06:30:15PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: > Most of the CPUFreq drivers do similar things in .exit() and .verify() routines > and .attr. So its better if we have generic routines for them which can be used > by cpufreq drivers then. > > This patch uses these generic routines for this driver. > > Cc: Andrew Lunn > Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar > --- > drivers/cpufreq/kirkwood-cpufreq.c | 22 +++------------------- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-) Hi Viresh You can add: Tested-by: Andrew Lunn to [PATCH 069/228] cpufreq: kirkwood: Use generic cpufreq routines [PATCH 107/228] cpufreq: kirkwood: don't initialize part of policy that is set by core [PATCH 161/228] cpufreq: kirkwood: Convert to light weight ->target_index() routine [PATCH 195/228] cpufreq: kirkwood: remove calls to cpufreq_notify_transition() It does however require the patch: http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg273378.html but this is not because of this patch series, it was already broken. Thanks Andrew From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: andrew@lunn.ch (Andrew Lunn) Date: Sat, 14 Sep 2013 11:31:25 +0200 Subject: [PATCH 069/228] cpufreq: kirkwood: Use generic cpufreq routines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20130914093125.GE23705@lunn.ch> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 06:30:15PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: > Most of the CPUFreq drivers do similar things in .exit() and .verify() routines > and .attr. So its better if we have generic routines for them which can be used > by cpufreq drivers then. > > This patch uses these generic routines for this driver. > > Cc: Andrew Lunn > Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar > --- > drivers/cpufreq/kirkwood-cpufreq.c | 22 +++------------------- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-) Hi Viresh You can add: Tested-by: Andrew Lunn to [PATCH 069/228] cpufreq: kirkwood: Use generic cpufreq routines [PATCH 107/228] cpufreq: kirkwood: don't initialize part of policy that is set by core [PATCH 161/228] cpufreq: kirkwood: Convert to light weight ->target_index() routine [PATCH 195/228] cpufreq: kirkwood: remove calls to cpufreq_notify_transition() It does however require the patch: http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg273378.html but this is not because of this patch series, it was already broken. Thanks Andrew