From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nishanth Menon Subject: Re: cpufreq on PandaBoard Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2013 09:01:53 -0600 Message-ID: <528B7D61.5020206@ti.com> References: <87eh6ca150.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from devils.ext.ti.com ([198.47.26.153]:58622 "EHLO devils.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751568Ab3KSPCU (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Nov 2013 10:02:20 -0500 In-Reply-To: <87eh6ca150.fsf@gmail.com> Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: Ben Gamari , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-omap On 11/19/2013 08:59 AM, Ben Gamari wrote: > > Booting a PandaBoard with a recent kernel and devicetree appears to be a > rather messy process. There are dozens of devicetree-related warnings > spewed on boot (many pertaining to missing regulators). At the moment, > however, I'm most interested in this, > > cpufreq-cpu0 cpufreq-cpu0.0: no of_node; not parsing pinctrl DT > cpu cpu0: dummy supplies not allowed > cpufreq_cpu0: failed to get cpu0 regulator: -19 > cpufreq_cpu0: failed to get cpu0 clock: -2 > cpufreq-cpu0: probe of cpufreq-cpu0.0 failed with error -2 > > What is the status of cpufreq on the PandaBoard? Is this expected to > work? > > More generally, if one wants a fairly recent kernel supporting the > PandaBoard's hardware what kernel tree should be used? Is mainline not > yet appropriate? Is linux-next preferred? Perhaps a ti-maintained tree? for upstream: Wait for the clock nodes to get merged.. we are at v9 of discussion thread here[1]. for ti-maintained tree, you need to talk to TI support folks for appropriate kernel for your product line. [1] http://marc.info/?t=138271672500002&r=1&w=2 -- Regards, Nishanth Menon From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: nm@ti.com (Nishanth Menon) Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2013 09:01:53 -0600 Subject: cpufreq on PandaBoard In-Reply-To: <87eh6ca150.fsf@gmail.com> References: <87eh6ca150.fsf@gmail.com> Message-ID: <528B7D61.5020206@ti.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 11/19/2013 08:59 AM, Ben Gamari wrote: > > Booting a PandaBoard with a recent kernel and devicetree appears to be a > rather messy process. There are dozens of devicetree-related warnings > spewed on boot (many pertaining to missing regulators). At the moment, > however, I'm most interested in this, > > cpufreq-cpu0 cpufreq-cpu0.0: no of_node; not parsing pinctrl DT > cpu cpu0: dummy supplies not allowed > cpufreq_cpu0: failed to get cpu0 regulator: -19 > cpufreq_cpu0: failed to get cpu0 clock: -2 > cpufreq-cpu0: probe of cpufreq-cpu0.0 failed with error -2 > > What is the status of cpufreq on the PandaBoard? Is this expected to > work? > > More generally, if one wants a fairly recent kernel supporting the > PandaBoard's hardware what kernel tree should be used? Is mainline not > yet appropriate? Is linux-next preferred? Perhaps a ti-maintained tree? for upstream: Wait for the clock nodes to get merged.. we are at v9 of discussion thread here[1]. for ti-maintained tree, you need to talk to TI support folks for appropriate kernel for your product line. [1] http://marc.info/?t=138271672500002&r=1&w=2 -- Regards, Nishanth Menon