Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/2] cpufreq: brcmstb-avs-cpufreq: prefer SCMI cpufreq if supported | From | Sudeep Holla <> | Date | Thu, 19 Apr 2018 11:37:29 +0100 |
| |
On 19/04/18 05:16, Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 18-04-18, 08:56, Markus Mayer wrote: >> From: Jim Quinlan <jim2101024@gmail.com> >> >> If the SCMI cpufreq driver is supported, we bail, so that the new >> approach can be used. >> >> Signed-off-by: Jim Quinlan <jim2101024@gmail.com> >> Signed-off-by: Markus Mayer <mmayer@broadcom.com> >> --- >> drivers/cpufreq/brcmstb-avs-cpufreq.c | 16 ++++++++++++++++ >> 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/brcmstb-avs-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/brcmstb-avs-cpufreq.c >> index b07559b9ed99..b4861a730162 100644 >> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/brcmstb-avs-cpufreq.c >> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/brcmstb-avs-cpufreq.c >> @@ -164,6 +164,8 @@ >> #define BRCM_AVS_CPU_INTR "brcm,avs-cpu-l2-intr" >> #define BRCM_AVS_HOST_INTR "sw_intr" >> >> +#define ARM_SCMI_COMPAT "arm,scmi" >> + >> struct pmap { >> unsigned int mode; >> unsigned int p1; >> @@ -511,6 +513,20 @@ static int brcm_avs_prepare_init(struct platform_device *pdev) >> struct device *dev; >> int host_irq, ret; >> >> + /* >> + * If the SCMI cpufreq driver is supported, we bail, so that the more >> + * modern approach can be used. >> + */ >> + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARM_SCMI_PROTOCOL)) { >> + struct device_node *np; >> + >> + np = of_find_compatible_node(NULL, NULL, ARM_SCMI_COMPAT); >> + if (np) { >> + of_node_put(np); >> + return -ENXIO; >> + } >> + } >> + > > What about adding !CONFIG_ARM_SCMI_PROTOCOL in Kconfig dependency and don't > compile the driver at all ? >
Unfortunately, that may not be good idea with single image needing both configs to be enabled.
-- Regards, Sudeep
| |