lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Jul]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRE: [PATCH v6 2/6] ARM: EXYNOS: Move cpufreq and cpuidle device registration to init_machine
Date
Hi Kukjin,

>
> On 07/07/14 12:50, Pankaj Dubey wrote:
> > As exynos_cpuidle_init and exynos_cpufreq_init function have just one
> > lines of code for registering platform devices. We can move these
> > lines to exynos_dt_machine_init and delete exynos_cpuidle_init and
> > exynos_cpufreq_init function. This will help in reducing lines of code
> > in exynos.c, making it more cleaner.
> >
> > Suggested-by: Tomasz Figa<t.figa@samsung.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Pankaj Dubey<pankaj.dubey@samsung.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Tomasz Figa<t.figa@samsung.com>
> > ---
> > arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c | 20 ++++----------------
> > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c
> > b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c index ff60b4c..47170eb 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c
> > @@ -171,19 +171,6 @@ static struct platform_device exynos_cpuidle = {
> > .id = -1,
> > };
> >
> > -void __init exynos_cpuidle_init(void) -{
> > - if (soc_is_exynos5440())
> > - return;
> > -
> > - platform_device_register(&exynos_cpuidle);
> > -}
> > -
> > -void __init exynos_cpufreq_init(void) -{
> > - platform_device_register_simple("exynos-cpufreq", -1, NULL, 0);
> > -}
> > -
> > void __iomem *sysram_base_addr;
> > void __iomem *sysram_ns_base_addr;
> >
> > @@ -300,10 +287,11 @@ static void __init exynos_dt_machine_init(void)
> > if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SMP))
> > exynos_sysram_init();
> >
> > - if (!of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos5420"))
> > - exynos_cpuidle_init();
> > + if (!of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos5420") ||
> > + !of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos5440"))
> > + platform_device_register(&exynos_cpuidle);
> >
> > - exynos_cpufreq_init();
> > + platform_device_register_simple("exynos-cpufreq", -1, NULL, 0);
> >
> > of_platform_populate(NULL, of_default_bus_match_table, NULL, NULL);
> > }
>
> This cannot be applied in my tree now....
>

May I know what the issue is? As I am able to rebase this patch on today's
kgene/for-next
and could not see any merge conflict.
If you think I need to respin this patch please let me know.

Thanks,
Pankaj Dubey

> - Kukjin



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-07-08 10:21    [W:0.096 / U:3.444 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site