From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnd Bergmann Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: exynos: allow disabling cpufreq drivers Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2013 16:33:17 +0200 Message-ID: <201304191633.17613.arnd@arndb.de> References: <201304191554.29679.arnd@arndb.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <201304191554.29679.arnd@arndb.de> Sender: cpufreq-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="us-ascii" To: cpufreq@vger.kernel.org Cc: Sylwester Nawrocki , Tomasz Figa , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Kukjin Kim , Thomas Abraham , Viresh Kumar On Friday 19 April 2013, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > Commit 6e6aac7590 "ARM: EXYNOS: Migrate clock support to common > clock framework" broke support for the exynos cpufreq drivers. > While we're waiting for a fix for this, let's get back to a state > where the kernel builds again with the cpufreq subsystem enabled > but ARM_EXYNOS_CPUFREQ disabled. I assume that this was the intention > behind this Kconfig symbol anyway. > > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann > Cc: Sylwester Nawrocki > Cc: Tomasz Figa > Cc: Thomas Abraham > Cc: Kukjin Kim > Cc: cpufreq@vger.kernel.org > Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki Hmm, actually this conflicts heavily with the other Kconfig changes in the cpufreq tree. Any other idea how to resolve this? Arnd > --- > Rafael, I'm putting this patch into the arm-soc tree now to avoid > a bug based on a patch that I got from Kukjin. If you have any > objections, please let me know so I can revert it again. > > Everyone else: Why does 6e6aac7590 have your "Tested-by" and > "Signed-off-by" tags on it when it's obviously broken? Who is > fixing this? Having no working exynos cpufreq support in 3.10 > would be a serious regression.