From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S932614AbcLGRXB (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Wed, 7 Dec 2016 12:23:01 -0500
Received: from gloria.sntech.de ([95.129.55.99]:40101 "EHLO gloria.sntech.de"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S1752809AbcLGRW5 (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Wed, 7 Dec 2016 12:22:57 -0500
From: Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de>
To: Brian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org>
Cc: linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Caesar Wang <wxt@rock-chips.com>,
        Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        Stephen Barber <smbarber@chromium.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Chris Zhong <zyw@rock-chips.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/9] arm64: dts: rockchip: partially describe PWM regulators for Gru
Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2016 17:48:24 +0100
Message-ID: <2418784.7dMdkAyuIx@phil>
User-Agent: KMail/5.2.3 (Linux/4.7.0-1-amd64; KDE/5.27.0; x86_64; ; )
In-Reply-To: <1480645653-36943-9-git-send-email-briannorris@chromium.org>
References: <1480645653-36943-1-git-send-email-briannorris@chromium.org> <1480645653-36943-9-git-send-email-briannorris@chromium.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Hi Brian,

Am Donnerstag, 1. Dezember 2016, 18:27:32 CET schrieb Brian Norris:
> We need to add regulators to the CPU nodes, so cpufreq doesn't think it
> can crank up the clock speed without changing the voltage. However, we
> don't yet have the DT bindings to fully describe the Over Voltage
> Protection (OVP) circuits on these boards. Without that description, we
> might end up changing the voltage too much, too fast.
> 
> Add the pwm-regulator descriptions and associate the CPU OPPs, but leave
> them disabled.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Brian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org>

is there a specific reason for keeping this change separate?
While it is nice for documentation reasons, as it stands now the previous 
patch introduces a regression (cpufreq trying to scale without regulators) and 
immediately fixes it here.

So if you're ok with it, I'd like to merge this one back into the previous 
patch when applying.


Heiko