From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: robert.jarzmik@free.fr (Robert Jarzmik) Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2016 22:06:10 +0200 Subject: [PATCH v2 1/4] cpufreq: pxa: use generic platdev driver for device-tree In-Reply-To: <20161019135208.GG11471@vireshk-i7> (Viresh Kumar's message of "Wed, 19 Oct 2016 19:22:08 +0530") References: <1476561450-28407-1-git-send-email-robert.jarzmik@free.fr> <1476561450-28407-2-git-send-email-robert.jarzmik@free.fr> <20161018113835.GB11471@vireshk-i7> <87r37d4qlw.fsf@belgarion.home> <20161019135208.GG11471@vireshk-i7> Message-ID: <87bmyg3xzh.fsf@belgarion.home> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Viresh Kumar writes: >> >> + { .compatible = "marvell,pxa250", }, >> >> + { .compatible = "marvell,pxa270", }, >> >> >> >> { .compatible = "samsung,exynos3250", }, >> >> { .compatible = "samsung,exynos4210", }, >> > >> > Isn't there a race between cpufreq-dt and the platform driver to >> > register first ? >> Ah, could you be more specific about the race you're talking of ? >> >> My understanding was that cpufreq-dt-platdev does create the device, and >> cpufreq-dt is a driver for it, so there is no race but a direct relationship >> AFAIU. > > I mean that both the driver may try to register to the cpufreq core if > they are both compiled in a single image. Euh I still don't follow you. The only driver that can register to the cpufreq core is cpufreq-dt. Now the only case I see is that there are 2 cpufreq-dt platform_device created from cpufreq-dt-platdev. Given that there is only 1 call to platform_device_register_data() in it, I don't see how it is possible. Now if you are worried that 2 cpufreq-dt devices are created, ie. 1 for pxa25x and one for pxa27x: - this looks impossible given the cpufreq_dt_platdev_init() code - no device-tree will ever be compatible with both of them, even if a single kernel binary will be compatible with both of them Tell me if this is the information you're looking for. Cheers. -- Robert