Messages in this thread | | | From | Jernej Škrabec <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/5] cpufreq: sun50i: Add D1 support | Date | Thu, 14 Dec 2023 18:15:01 +0100 |
| |
On Thursday, December 14, 2023 5:40:10 PM CET Andre Przywara wrote: > On Thu, 14 Dec 2023 17:29:30 +0100 > Jernej Škrabec <jernej.skrabec@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > > On Thursday, December 14, 2023 11:33:39 AM CET Brandon Cheo Fusi wrote: > > > Add support for D1 based devices to the Allwinner H6 cpufreq > > > driver > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Brandon Cheo Fusi <fusibrandon13@gmail.com> > > > --- > > > drivers/cpufreq/sun50i-cpufreq-nvmem.c | 1 + > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/sun50i-cpufreq-nvmem.c b/drivers/cpufreq/sun50i-cpufreq-nvmem.c > > > index 32a9c88f8..ccf83780f 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/sun50i-cpufreq-nvmem.c > > > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/sun50i-cpufreq-nvmem.c > > > @@ -160,6 +160,7 @@ static struct platform_driver sun50i_cpufreq_driver = { > > > > > > static const struct of_device_id sun50i_cpufreq_match_list[] = { > > > { .compatible = "allwinner,sun50i-h6" }, > > > + { .compatible = "allwinner,sun20i-d1" }, > > > > This is not needed, as there is no functionality change. > > That was my first reflex, too, but this is the *board* (fallback) > compatible, listed in the root node, so you have to list it here for each > SoC, together with the respective blocklist in the next patch. > We are doing the same for the H616, and actually also need that for the > H618. Weird, I know, but last time I check not easy to fix.
Oh, that's bad. What's the rationale to have so complicated probe method? Why not using standard, compatible based one?
Best regards, Jernej
| |