From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: viresh.kumar@linaro.org (Viresh Kumar) Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2018 15:05:48 +0530 Subject: [PATCH 2/2] cpufreq: brcmstb-avs-cpufreq: prefer SCMI cpufreq if supported In-Reply-To: References: <20180418155643.36464-1-code@mmayer.net> <20180418155643.36464-3-code@mmayer.net> <20180419041632.GF24576@vireshk-i7> <74b70865-dfa9-25c8-20f8-3d2f722b9b2d@arm.com> <20180420044259.GA2873@vireshk-i7> Message-ID: <20180420093548.GA2989@vireshk-i7> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 20-04-18, 10:15, Sudeep Holla wrote: > It still doesn't give the flexibility to switch between the two > implementations boot time based on some firmware config(e.g. DT status > property). I agree, but it didn't look like they need flexibility :) Lets see how the intend to use it. If they are *always* going to use SCPI if that is available, then it should be solved at Kconfig level only. Else they shouldn't put such code in the driver to quit early. -- viresh