| Message ID | 20130909143253.GD4624@S2101-09.ap.freescale.net (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Not Applicable, archived |
| Headers | show |
On 09/09/13 15:32, Shawn Guo wrote: > Hi Sudeep, > > On Mon, Sep 09, 2013 at 10:24:39AM +0100, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha wrote: >> Hi Shawn, >> >> Can you please clarify ? The fix would be as below but I would like to >> know if setting cpu_dev to get_cpu_device(0) instead of &pdev->dev has >> any impact on other parts of code using cpu_dev ? > > I'm sorry. I should have given it a test on hardware before ACKing the > changes. > > The fix below should not have other impact except the prefix of dev_err > [info, dbg] message output ('cpufreq-cpu0:' to 'cpu cpu0:'), which > shouldn't be a problem. > Hi Shawn, Ok. But I am bit suspicious about devm_clk_get(cpu_dev, NULL). I don't understand completely as how the clock are registered(whether with dev_id or with connection_id). A quick grep revealed that i.mx and shmobile is using conection id while registering. If the clock is registered with connection id and retrieved with cpu_dev(now dev_id is cpu0 and not cpufreq-cpu0), IIUC that would break. If we pass pdev->dev for clk_get, it should be fine but again IIUC it breaks highbank which gets all the information from DT. So only solution I can think of is to continue to have the code assigning (&pdev->dev)->of_node with cpu device node which is not clean and arguable as incorrect since there is no DT node for cpufreq-cpu0. I don't have a strong opinion though. Let me know how would you like to fix this. >> >> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-cpu0.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-cpu0.c >> index cbfffa9..871c336 100644 >> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-cpu0.c >> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-cpu0.c >> @@ -177,7 +177,7 @@ static int cpu0_cpufreq_probe(struct platform_device >> *pdev) >> struct device_node *np; >> int ret; >> >> - cpu_dev = &pdev->dev; >> + cpu_dev = get_cpu_device(0); >> >> np = of_node_get(cpu_dev->of_node); >> if (!np) { >> > > The imx6q-cpufreq driver needs a similar fixing. Please include the > following changes into your fixing patches. Thanks. > Ok no problem I can post the fix based on response for the above question. Regard, Sudeep -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pm" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-imx6q.c b/arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-imx6q.c index 85a1b51..69fd4b6 100644 --- a/arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-imx6q.c +++ b/arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-imx6q.c @@ -233,9 +233,10 @@ put_node: of_node_put(np); } -static void __init imx6q_opp_init(struct device *cpu_dev) +static void __init imx6q_opp_init(void) { struct device_node *np; + struct device *cpu_dev = get_cpu_device(0); np = of_node_get(cpu_dev->of_node); if (!np) { @@ -268,7 +269,7 @@ static void __init imx6q_init_late(void) imx6q_cpuidle_init(); if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARM_IMX6Q_CPUFREQ)) { - imx6q_opp_init(&imx6q_cpufreq_pdev.dev); + imx6q_opp_init(); platform_device_register(&imx6q_cpufreq_pdev); } } diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/imx6q-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/imx6q-cpufreq.c index 3e39654..d7ebd91 100644 --- a/drivers/cpufreq/imx6q-cpufreq.c +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/imx6q-cpufreq.c @@ -7,6 +7,7 @@ */ #include <linux/clk.h> +#include <linux/cpu.h> #include <linux/cpufreq.h> #include <linux/delay.h> #include <linux/err.h> @@ -202,7 +203,7 @@ static int imx6q_cpufreq_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) unsigned long min_volt, max_volt; int num, ret; - cpu_dev = &pdev->dev; + cpu_dev = get_cpu_device(0); np = of_node_get(cpu_dev->of_node); if (!np) {