From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: arnd@arndb.de (Arnd Bergmann)
Date: Wed, 14 May 2014 15:18:01 +0200
Subject: [PATCH v4 7/8] ARM: Exynos: switch to using generic cpufreq-cpu0
 driver
In-Reply-To: <CAKohpo=mL4Wd3wajXQHnYW463-L1=QX=5krpPhOJ=NYet3xXoA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1400029876-5830-1-git-send-email-thomas.ab@samsung.com>
 <1480209.xTrtNKOy7N@phil>
 <CAKohpo=mL4Wd3wajXQHnYW463-L1=QX=5krpPhOJ=NYet3xXoA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <61090198.zodNL4xIig@wuerfel>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On Wednesday 14 May 2014 18:44:46 Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 14 May 2014 18:41, Heiko St?bner <heiko@sntech.de> wrote:
> > Am Mittwoch, 14. Mai 2014, 18:35:29 schrieb Viresh Kumar:
> >> On 14 May 2014 18:20, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> 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?

Good idea to put it as a property into the CPU node.

> Lets see what DT maintainers have to say on this, I would rather go for a
> more straight forward name: "scaling-driver"  ..

Both sound fine to me.

	Arnd