From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: sudeep.holla@arm.com (Sudeep Holla) Date: Wed, 14 May 2014 15:09:32 +0100 Subject: [PATCH v4 7/8] ARM: Exynos: switch to using generic cpufreq-cpu0 driver In-Reply-To: References: <1400029876-5830-1-git-send-email-thomas.ab@samsung.com> <6835645.2kTGeWTa9p@wuerfel> <1480209.xTrtNKOy7N@phil> Message-ID: <5373791C.8070303@arm.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 14/05/14 15:03, Thomas Abraham wrote: > On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 6:41 PM, Heiko St?bner wrote: >> Am Mittwoch, 14. Mai 2014, 18:35:29 schrieb Viresh Kumar: >>> On 14 May 2014 18:20, Arnd Bergmann wrote: >>>> Could we please come up with a way to probe this from DT in the >>>> cpufreq-cpu0 driver itself, so we don't have to add a device in every >>>> platform using it? >>> Its followed that way because DT Maintainers had strong objections >>> to creating virtual device nodes and haven't allowed creation of nodes >>> for cpufreq drivers.. For which there is no physical device, as CPU already >>> has a separate node.. >> >> as we already have the "enable-method" property for enabling/disabling cpus, >> would something like a "scaling-method" be feasible? >> > > "scaling-method" also sounds like a software specific property. Would > that be something that will be acceptable in dt? How about dvfs-method ? But the value should not be based on the driver they use, but something more generic. Regards, Sudeep