[v3] cpufreq: exynos: Fix the compile error
diff mbox

Message ID 000001cf70f0$2e48f930$8adaeb90$@samsung.com
State Not Applicable, archived
Headers show

Commit Message

jhbird.choi@samsung.com May 16, 2014, 10:18 a.m. UTC
Commit 7da83a80 ("ARM: EXYNOS: Migrate Exynos specific macros from plat to mach") which lands in samsung tree causes build breakage
for cpufreq-exynos like following:

drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c: In function 'exynos_cpufreq_probe':
drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:166:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'soc_is_exynos4210'
[-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:168:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'soc_is_exynos4212'
[-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:168:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'soc_is_exynos4412'
[-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:170:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'soc_is_exynos5250'
[-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
make[2]: *** [drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.o] Error 1
make[2]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
drivers/cpufreq/exynos4x12-cpufreq.c: In function 'exynos4x12_set_clkdiv':
drivers/cpufreq/exynos4x12-cpufreq.c:118:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'soc_is_exynos4212'
[-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
make[2]: *** [drivers/cpufreq/exynos4x12-cpufreq.o] Error 1
make[1]: *** [drivers/cpufreq] Error 2
This fixes above error with getting SoC information via of_machine_is_compatible() instead of soc_is_exynosXXXX().

Signed-off-by: Jonghwan Choi <jhbird.choi@samsung.com>
---
 drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c     |   20 +++++++++++++++++---
 drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.h     |    8 ++++++++
 drivers/cpufreq/exynos4x12-cpufreq.c |   11 ++++-------
 3 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

Comments

Kim Kukjin May 16, 2014, 10:54 a.m. UTC | #1
Jonghwan Choi wrote:
> 
> Commit 7da83a80 ("ARM: EXYNOS: Migrate Exynos specific macros from plat to
> mach") which lands in samsung tree causes build breakage
> for cpufreq-exynos like following:
> 
> drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c: In function 'exynos_cpufreq_probe':
> drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:166:2: error: implicit declaration of
> function 'soc_is_exynos4210'
> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:168:2: error: implicit declaration of
> function 'soc_is_exynos4212'
> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:168:2: error: implicit declaration of
> function 'soc_is_exynos4412'
> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:170:2: error: implicit declaration of
> function 'soc_is_exynos5250'
> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
> make[2]: *** [drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.o] Error 1
> make[2]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
> drivers/cpufreq/exynos4x12-cpufreq.c: In function 'exynos4x12_set_clkdiv':
> drivers/cpufreq/exynos4x12-cpufreq.c:118:2: error: implicit declaration of
> function 'soc_is_exynos4212'
> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
> make[2]: *** [drivers/cpufreq/exynos4x12-cpufreq.o] Error 1
> make[1]: *** [drivers/cpufreq] Error 2
> This fixes above error with getting SoC information via
> of_machine_is_compatible() instead of soc_is_exynosXXXX().
> 

Probably,
Suggested-by: Tomasz Figa ?

> Signed-off-by: Jonghwan Choi <jhbird.choi@samsung.com>

Looks better.

Rafael, if you have no objection on this, shall I pick this into samsung
tree for 3.16 because of the current build breakage with enabling exynos
cpufreq?

Thanks,
Kukjin

> ---
>  drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c     |   20 +++++++++++++++++---
>  drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.h     |    8 ++++++++
>  drivers/cpufreq/exynos4x12-cpufreq.c |   11 ++++-------
>  3 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/exynos-
> cpufreq.c
> index f99cfe2..9aecffef 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c
> @@ -17,6 +17,7 @@
>  #include <linux/regulator/consumer.h>
>  #include <linux/cpufreq.h>
>  #include <linux/platform_device.h>
> +#include <linux/of.h>
> 
>  #include <plat/cpu.h>
> 
> @@ -163,11 +164,24 @@ static int exynos_cpufreq_probe(struct
> platform_device *pdev)
>  	if (!exynos_info)
>  		return -ENOMEM;
> 
> -	if (soc_is_exynos4210())
> +	if (of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos4210")) {
> +		exynos_info->type = EXYNOS_SOC_4210;
> +	} else if (of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos4212")) {
> +		exynos_info->type = EXYNOS_SOC_4212;
> +	} else if (of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos4412")) {
> +		exynos_info->type = EXYNOS_SOC_4212;
> +	} else if (of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos5250")) {
> +		exynos_info->type = EXYNOS_SOC_5250;
> +	} else {
> +		pr_err("%s: Unknown SoC type\n", __func__);
> +		return -ENODEV;
> +	}
> +
> +	if (exynos_info->type == EXYNOS_SOC_4210)
>  		ret = exynos4210_cpufreq_init(exynos_info);
> -	else if (soc_is_exynos4212() || soc_is_exynos4412())
> +	else if (exynos_info->type == EXYNOS_SOC_4212 || exynos_info->type
> == EXYNOS_SOC_4412)
>  		ret = exynos4x12_cpufreq_init(exynos_info);
> -	else if (soc_is_exynos5250())
> +	else if (exynos_info->type == EXYNOS_SOC_5250)
>  		ret = exynos5250_cpufreq_init(exynos_info);
>  	else
>  		return 0;
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.h b/drivers/cpufreq/exynos-
> cpufreq.h
> index 3ddade8..f189547 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.h
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.h
> @@ -17,6 +17,13 @@ enum cpufreq_level_index {
>  	L20,
>  };
> 
> +enum exynos_soc_type {
> +	EXYNOS_SOC_4210,
> +	EXYNOS_SOC_4212,
> +	EXYNOS_SOC_4412,
> +	EXYNOS_SOC_5250,
> +};
> +
>  #define APLL_FREQ(f, a0, a1, a2, a3, a4, a5, a6, a7, b0, b1, b2, m, p, s)
> \
>  	{ \
>  		.freq = (f) * 1000, \
> @@ -34,6 +41,7 @@ struct apll_freq {
>  };
> 
>  struct exynos_dvfs_info {
> +	enum exynos_soc_type type;
>  	unsigned long	mpll_freq_khz;
>  	unsigned int	pll_safe_idx;
>  	struct clk	*cpu_clk;
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/exynos4x12-cpufreq.c
> b/drivers/cpufreq/exynos4x12-cpufreq.c
> index 466c76a..63a3907 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/exynos4x12-cpufreq.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/exynos4x12-cpufreq.c
> @@ -100,7 +100,6 @@ static struct apll_freq apll_freq_4412[] = {
>  static void exynos4x12_set_clkdiv(unsigned int div_index)
>  {
>  	unsigned int tmp;
> -	unsigned int stat_cpu1;
> 
>  	/* Change Divider - CPU0 */
> 
> @@ -115,13 +114,11 @@ static void exynos4x12_set_clkdiv(unsigned int
> div_index)
>  	tmp = apll_freq_4x12[div_index].clk_div_cpu1;
> 
>  	__raw_writel(tmp, EXYNOS4_CLKDIV_CPU1);
> -	if (soc_is_exynos4212())
> -		stat_cpu1 = 0x11;
> -	else
> -		stat_cpu1 = 0x111;
> 
> -	while (__raw_readl(EXYNOS4_CLKDIV_STATCPU1) & stat_cpu1)
> +	do {
>  		cpu_relax();
> +		tmp = __raw_readl(EXYNOS4_CLKDIV_STATCPU1);
> +	} while (tmp != 0x0);
>  }
> 
>  static void exynos4x12_set_apll(unsigned int index)
> @@ -184,7 +181,7 @@ int exynos4x12_cpufreq_init(struct exynos_dvfs_info
> *info)
>  	if (IS_ERR(mout_apll))
>  		goto err_mout_apll;
> 
> -	if (soc_is_exynos4212())
> +	if (info->type == EXYNOS_SOC_4212)
>  		apll_freq_4x12 = apll_freq_4212;
>  	else
>  		apll_freq_4x12 = apll_freq_4412;
> --
> 1.7.10.4

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Viresh Kumar May 16, 2014, 11:07 a.m. UTC | #2
On 16 May 2014 15:48, Jonghwan Choi <jhbird.choi@samsung.com> wrote:
> Commit 7da83a80 ("ARM: EXYNOS: Migrate Exynos specific macros from plat to mach") which lands in samsung tree causes build breakage
> for cpufreq-exynos like following:
>
> drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c: In function 'exynos_cpufreq_probe':
> drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:166:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'soc_is_exynos4210'
> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:168:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'soc_is_exynos4212'
> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:168:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'soc_is_exynos4412'
> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:170:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'soc_is_exynos5250'
> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
> make[2]: *** [drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.o] Error 1
> make[2]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
> drivers/cpufreq/exynos4x12-cpufreq.c: In function 'exynos4x12_set_clkdiv':
> drivers/cpufreq/exynos4x12-cpufreq.c:118:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'soc_is_exynos4212'
> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
> make[2]: *** [drivers/cpufreq/exynos4x12-cpufreq.o] Error 1
> make[1]: *** [drivers/cpufreq] Error 2

Blank line here..

> This fixes above error with getting SoC information via of_machine_is_compatible() instead of soc_is_exynosXXXX().
>
> Signed-off-by: Jonghwan Choi <jhbird.choi@samsung.com>
> ---
>  drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c     |   20 +++++++++++++++++---
>  drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.h     |    8 ++++++++
>  drivers/cpufreq/exynos4x12-cpufreq.c |   11 ++++-------
>  3 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c
> index f99cfe2..9aecffef 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c
> @@ -17,6 +17,7 @@
>  #include <linux/regulator/consumer.h>
>  #include <linux/cpufreq.h>
>  #include <linux/platform_device.h>
> +#include <linux/of.h>
>
>  #include <plat/cpu.h>
>
> @@ -163,11 +164,24 @@ static int exynos_cpufreq_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>         if (!exynos_info)
>                 return -ENOMEM;
>
> -       if (soc_is_exynos4210())
> +       if (of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos4210")) {
> +               exynos_info->type = EXYNOS_SOC_4210;
> +       } else if (of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos4212")) {
> +               exynos_info->type = EXYNOS_SOC_4212;
> +       } else if (of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos4412")) {
> +               exynos_info->type = EXYNOS_SOC_4212;

4412 ?

> +       } else if (of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos5250")) {
> +               exynos_info->type = EXYNOS_SOC_5250;
> +       } else {
> +               pr_err("%s: Unknown SoC type\n", __func__);
> +               return -ENODEV;
> +       }
> +
> +       if (exynos_info->type == EXYNOS_SOC_4210)
>                 ret = exynos4210_cpufreq_init(exynos_info);
> -       else if (soc_is_exynos4212() || soc_is_exynos4412())
> +       else if (exynos_info->type == EXYNOS_SOC_4212 || exynos_info->type == EXYNOS_SOC_4412)
>                 ret = exynos4x12_cpufreq_init(exynos_info);
> -       else if (soc_is_exynos5250())
> +       else if (exynos_info->type == EXYNOS_SOC_5250)
>                 ret = exynos5250_cpufreq_init(exynos_info);
>         else
>                 return 0;

Do this in the first if/else only..
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Rafael J. Wysocki May 16, 2014, 11:04 p.m. UTC | #3
On Friday, May 16, 2014 07:54:01 PM Kukjin Kim wrote:
> Jonghwan Choi wrote:
> > 
> > Commit 7da83a80 ("ARM: EXYNOS: Migrate Exynos specific macros from plat to
> > mach") which lands in samsung tree causes build breakage
> > for cpufreq-exynos like following:
> > 
> > drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c: In function 'exynos_cpufreq_probe':
> > drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:166:2: error: implicit declaration of
> > function 'soc_is_exynos4210'
> > [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:168:2: error: implicit declaration of
> > function 'soc_is_exynos4212'
> > [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:168:2: error: implicit declaration of
> > function 'soc_is_exynos4412'
> > [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:170:2: error: implicit declaration of
> > function 'soc_is_exynos5250'
> > [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
> > make[2]: *** [drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.o] Error 1
> > make[2]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
> > drivers/cpufreq/exynos4x12-cpufreq.c: In function 'exynos4x12_set_clkdiv':
> > drivers/cpufreq/exynos4x12-cpufreq.c:118:2: error: implicit declaration of
> > function 'soc_is_exynos4212'
> > [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
> > make[2]: *** [drivers/cpufreq/exynos4x12-cpufreq.o] Error 1
> > make[1]: *** [drivers/cpufreq] Error 2
> > This fixes above error with getting SoC information via
> > of_machine_is_compatible() instead of soc_is_exynosXXXX().
> > 
> 
> Probably,
> Suggested-by: Tomasz Figa ?
> 
> > Signed-off-by: Jonghwan Choi <jhbird.choi@samsung.com>
> 
> Looks better.
> 
> Rafael, if you have no objection on this, shall I pick this into samsung
> tree for 3.16 because of the current build breakage with enabling exynos
> cpufreq?

Please go ahead.
Kim Kukjin May 16, 2014, 11:24 p.m. UTC | #4
On 05/17/14 08:04, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Friday, May 16, 2014 07:54:01 PM Kukjin Kim wrote:
>> Jonghwan Choi wrote:
>>>
>>> Commit 7da83a80 ("ARM: EXYNOS: Migrate Exynos specific macros from plat to
>>> mach") which lands in samsung tree causes build breakage
>>> for cpufreq-exynos like following:
>>>
>>> drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c: In function 'exynos_cpufreq_probe':
>>> drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:166:2: error: implicit declaration of
>>> function 'soc_is_exynos4210'
>>> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>> drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:168:2: error: implicit declaration of
>>> function 'soc_is_exynos4212'
>>> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>> drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:168:2: error: implicit declaration of
>>> function 'soc_is_exynos4412'
>>> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>> drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:170:2: error: implicit declaration of
>>> function 'soc_is_exynos5250'
>>> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>> cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
>>> make[2]: *** [drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.o] Error 1
>>> make[2]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
>>> drivers/cpufreq/exynos4x12-cpufreq.c: In function 'exynos4x12_set_clkdiv':
>>> drivers/cpufreq/exynos4x12-cpufreq.c:118:2: error: implicit declaration of
>>> function 'soc_is_exynos4212'
>>> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>> cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
>>> make[2]: *** [drivers/cpufreq/exynos4x12-cpufreq.o] Error 1
>>> make[1]: *** [drivers/cpufreq] Error 2
>>> This fixes above error with getting SoC information via
>>> of_machine_is_compatible() instead of soc_is_exynosXXXX().
>>>
>>
>> Probably,
>> Suggested-by: Tomasz Figa ?
>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Jonghwan Choi<jhbird.choi@samsung.com>
>>
>> Looks better.
>>
>> Rafael, if you have no objection on this, shall I pick this into samsung
>> tree for 3.16 because of the current build breakage with enabling exynos
>> cpufreq?
>
> Please go ahead.
>
Done.

Thanks,
Kukjin
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Kim Kukjin May 16, 2014, 11:26 p.m. UTC | #5
On 05/16/14 20:07, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 16 May 2014 15:48, Jonghwan Choi<jhbird.choi@samsung.com>  wrote:
>> Commit 7da83a80 ("ARM: EXYNOS: Migrate Exynos specific macros from plat to mach") which lands in samsung tree causes build breakage
>> for cpufreq-exynos like following:
>>
>> drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c: In function 'exynos_cpufreq_probe':
>> drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:166:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'soc_is_exynos4210'
>> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>> drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:168:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'soc_is_exynos4212'
>> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>> drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:168:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'soc_is_exynos4412'
>> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>> drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:170:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'soc_is_exynos5250'
>> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>> cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
>> make[2]: *** [drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.o] Error 1
>> make[2]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
>> drivers/cpufreq/exynos4x12-cpufreq.c: In function 'exynos4x12_set_clkdiv':
>> drivers/cpufreq/exynos4x12-cpufreq.c:118:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'soc_is_exynos4212'
>> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>> cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
>> make[2]: *** [drivers/cpufreq/exynos4x12-cpufreq.o] Error 1
>> make[1]: *** [drivers/cpufreq] Error 2
>
> Blank line here..
>
>> This fixes above error with getting SoC information via of_machine_is_compatible() instead of soc_is_exynosXXXX().
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jonghwan Choi<jhbird.choi@samsung.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c     |   20 +++++++++++++++++---
>>   drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.h     |    8 ++++++++
>>   drivers/cpufreq/exynos4x12-cpufreq.c |   11 ++++-------
>>   3 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c
>> index f99cfe2..9aecffef 100644
>> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c
>> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c
>> @@ -17,6 +17,7 @@
>>   #include<linux/regulator/consumer.h>
>>   #include<linux/cpufreq.h>
>>   #include<linux/platform_device.h>
>> +#include<linux/of.h>
>>
>>   #include<plat/cpu.h>
>>
>> @@ -163,11 +164,24 @@ static int exynos_cpufreq_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>          if (!exynos_info)
>>                  return -ENOMEM;
>>
>> -       if (soc_is_exynos4210())
>> +       if (of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos4210")) {
>> +               exynos_info->type = EXYNOS_SOC_4210;
>> +       } else if (of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos4212")) {
>> +               exynos_info->type = EXYNOS_SOC_4212;
>> +       } else if (of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos4412")) {
>> +               exynos_info->type = EXYNOS_SOC_4212;
>
> 4412 ?
>
Yes, I will fix when I apply.

>> +       } else if (of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos5250")) {
>> +               exynos_info->type = EXYNOS_SOC_5250;
>> +       } else {
>> +               pr_err("%s: Unknown SoC type\n", __func__);
>> +               return -ENODEV;
>> +       }
>> +
>> +       if (exynos_info->type == EXYNOS_SOC_4210)
>>                  ret = exynos4210_cpufreq_init(exynos_info);
>> -       else if (soc_is_exynos4212() || soc_is_exynos4412())
>> +       else if (exynos_info->type == EXYNOS_SOC_4212 || exynos_info->type == EXYNOS_SOC_4412)
>>                  ret = exynos4x12_cpufreq_init(exynos_info);
>> -       else if (soc_is_exynos5250())
>> +       else if (exynos_info->type == EXYNOS_SOC_5250)
>>                  ret = exynos5250_cpufreq_init(exynos_info);
>>          else
>>                  return 0;
>
> Do this in the first if/else only..

Probably, you mean following in above?

 >> -       if (soc_is_exynos4210())

I've applied this with fixing typo you mentioned just now, if any 
concerns, please kindly let me know.

Thanks,
Kukjin
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Tomasz Figa May 16, 2014, 11:28 p.m. UTC | #6
Hi Kukjin,

On 17.05.2014 01:24, Kukjin Kim wrote:
> On 05/17/14 08:04, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> On Friday, May 16, 2014 07:54:01 PM Kukjin Kim wrote:
>>> Jonghwan Choi wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Commit 7da83a80 ("ARM: EXYNOS: Migrate Exynos specific macros from
>>>> plat to
>>>> mach") which lands in samsung tree causes build breakage
>>>> for cpufreq-exynos like following:
>>>>
>>>> drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c: In function 'exynos_cpufreq_probe':
>>>> drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:166:2: error: implicit declaration of
>>>> function 'soc_is_exynos4210'
>>>> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>>> drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:168:2: error: implicit declaration of
>>>> function 'soc_is_exynos4212'
>>>> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>>> drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:168:2: error: implicit declaration of
>>>> function 'soc_is_exynos4412'
>>>> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>>> drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:170:2: error: implicit declaration of
>>>> function 'soc_is_exynos5250'
>>>> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>>> cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
>>>> make[2]: *** [drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.o] Error 1
>>>> make[2]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
>>>> drivers/cpufreq/exynos4x12-cpufreq.c: In function
>>>> 'exynos4x12_set_clkdiv':
>>>> drivers/cpufreq/exynos4x12-cpufreq.c:118:2: error: implicit
>>>> declaration of
>>>> function 'soc_is_exynos4212'
>>>> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>>> cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
>>>> make[2]: *** [drivers/cpufreq/exynos4x12-cpufreq.o] Error 1
>>>> make[1]: *** [drivers/cpufreq] Error 2
>>>> This fixes above error with getting SoC information via
>>>> of_machine_is_compatible() instead of soc_is_exynosXXXX().
>>>>
>>>
>>> Probably,
>>> Suggested-by: Tomasz Figa ?
>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Jonghwan Choi<jhbird.choi@samsung.com>
>>>
>>> Looks better.
>>>
>>> Rafael, if you have no objection on this, shall I pick this into samsung
>>> tree for 3.16 because of the current build breakage with enabling exynos
>>> cpufreq?
>>
>> Please go ahead.
>>
> Done.

What about Viresh's comments?

Best regards,
Tomasz
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Tomasz Figa May 16, 2014, 11:37 p.m. UTC | #7
On 17.05.2014 01:26, Kukjin Kim wrote:
> On 05/16/14 20:07, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>> On 16 May 2014 15:48, Jonghwan Choi<jhbird.choi@samsung.com>  wrote:
>>> Commit 7da83a80 ("ARM: EXYNOS: Migrate Exynos specific macros from
>>> plat to mach") which lands in samsung tree causes build breakage
>>> for cpufreq-exynos like following:
>>>
>>> drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c: In function 'exynos_cpufreq_probe':
>>> drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:166:2: error: implicit declaration
>>> of function 'soc_is_exynos4210'
>>> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>> drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:168:2: error: implicit declaration
>>> of function 'soc_is_exynos4212'
>>> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>> drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:168:2: error: implicit declaration
>>> of function 'soc_is_exynos4412'
>>> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>> drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:170:2: error: implicit declaration
>>> of function 'soc_is_exynos5250'
>>> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>> cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
>>> make[2]: *** [drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.o] Error 1
>>> make[2]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
>>> drivers/cpufreq/exynos4x12-cpufreq.c: In function
>>> 'exynos4x12_set_clkdiv':
>>> drivers/cpufreq/exynos4x12-cpufreq.c:118:2: error: implicit
>>> declaration of function 'soc_is_exynos4212'
>>> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>> cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
>>> make[2]: *** [drivers/cpufreq/exynos4x12-cpufreq.o] Error 1
>>> make[1]: *** [drivers/cpufreq] Error 2
>>
>> Blank line here..
>>
>>> This fixes above error with getting SoC information via
>>> of_machine_is_compatible() instead of soc_is_exynosXXXX().
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Jonghwan Choi<jhbird.choi@samsung.com>
>>> ---
>>>   drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c     |   20 +++++++++++++++++---
>>>   drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.h     |    8 ++++++++
>>>   drivers/cpufreq/exynos4x12-cpufreq.c |   11 ++++-------
>>>   3 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c
>>> b/drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c
>>> index f99cfe2..9aecffef 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c
>>> @@ -17,6 +17,7 @@
>>>   #include<linux/regulator/consumer.h>
>>>   #include<linux/cpufreq.h>
>>>   #include<linux/platform_device.h>
>>> +#include<linux/of.h>
>>>
>>>   #include<plat/cpu.h>
>>>
>>> @@ -163,11 +164,24 @@ static int exynos_cpufreq_probe(struct
>>> platform_device *pdev)
>>>          if (!exynos_info)
>>>                  return -ENOMEM;
>>>
>>> -       if (soc_is_exynos4210())
>>> +       if (of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos4210")) {
>>> +               exynos_info->type = EXYNOS_SOC_4210;
>>> +       } else if (of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos4212")) {
>>> +               exynos_info->type = EXYNOS_SOC_4212;
>>> +       } else if (of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos4412")) {
>>> +               exynos_info->type = EXYNOS_SOC_4212;
>>
>> 4412 ?
>>
> Yes, I will fix when I apply.
> 
>>> +       } else if (of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos5250")) {
>>> +               exynos_info->type = EXYNOS_SOC_5250;
>>> +       } else {
>>> +               pr_err("%s: Unknown SoC type\n", __func__);
>>> +               return -ENODEV;
>>> +       }
>>> +
>>> +       if (exynos_info->type == EXYNOS_SOC_4210)
>>>                  ret = exynos4210_cpufreq_init(exynos_info);
>>> -       else if (soc_is_exynos4212() || soc_is_exynos4412())
>>> +       else if (exynos_info->type == EXYNOS_SOC_4212 ||
>>> exynos_info->type == EXYNOS_SOC_4412)
>>>                  ret = exynos4x12_cpufreq_init(exynos_info);
>>> -       else if (soc_is_exynos5250())
>>> +       else if (exynos_info->type == EXYNOS_SOC_5250)
>>>                  ret = exynos5250_cpufreq_init(exynos_info);
>>>          else
>>>                  return 0;
>>
>> Do this in the first if/else only..
> 
> Probably, you mean following in above?
> 
>>> -       if (soc_is_exynos4210())
> 
> I've applied this with fixing typo you mentioned just now, if any
> concerns, please kindly let me know.

I think Viresh meant merging the two if/else blocks together, as follows:

	if (of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos4210")) {
		exynos_info->type = EXYNOS_SOC_4210;
		ret = exynos4210_cpufreq_init(exynos_info);
	} else if (of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos4212")) {
		exynos_info->type = EXYNOS_SOC_4212;
		ret = exynos4x12_cpufreq_init(exynos_info);
	} else if (of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos4412")) {
		exynos_info->type = EXYNOS_SOC_4412;
		ret = exynos4x12_cpufreq_init(exynos_info);
	} else if (of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos5250")) {
		exynos_info->type = EXYNOS_SOC_5250;
		ret = exynos5250_cpufreq_init(exynos_info);
	} else {
		pr_err("%s: Unknown SoC type\n", __func__);
		return -ENODEV;
	}

Best regards,
Tomasz
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Kim Kukjin May 16, 2014, 11:44 p.m. UTC | #8
On 05/17/14 08:37, Tomasz Figa wrote:
> On 17.05.2014 01:26, Kukjin Kim wrote:
>> On 05/16/14 20:07, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>>> On 16 May 2014 15:48, Jonghwan Choi<jhbird.choi@samsung.com>   wrote:
>>>> Commit 7da83a80 ("ARM: EXYNOS: Migrate Exynos specific macros from
>>>> plat to mach") which lands in samsung tree causes build breakage
>>>> for cpufreq-exynos like following:
>>>>
>>>> drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c: In function 'exynos_cpufreq_probe':
>>>> drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:166:2: error: implicit declaration
>>>> of function 'soc_is_exynos4210'
>>>> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>>> drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:168:2: error: implicit declaration
>>>> of function 'soc_is_exynos4212'
>>>> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>>> drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:168:2: error: implicit declaration
>>>> of function 'soc_is_exynos4412'
>>>> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>>> drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:170:2: error: implicit declaration
>>>> of function 'soc_is_exynos5250'
>>>> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>>> cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
>>>> make[2]: *** [drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.o] Error 1
>>>> make[2]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
>>>> drivers/cpufreq/exynos4x12-cpufreq.c: In function
>>>> 'exynos4x12_set_clkdiv':
>>>> drivers/cpufreq/exynos4x12-cpufreq.c:118:2: error: implicit
>>>> declaration of function 'soc_is_exynos4212'
>>>> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>>> cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
>>>> make[2]: *** [drivers/cpufreq/exynos4x12-cpufreq.o] Error 1
>>>> make[1]: *** [drivers/cpufreq] Error 2
>>>
>>> Blank line here..
>>>
>>>> This fixes above error with getting SoC information via
>>>> of_machine_is_compatible() instead of soc_is_exynosXXXX().
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Jonghwan Choi<jhbird.choi@samsung.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>    drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c     |   20 +++++++++++++++++---
>>>>    drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.h     |    8 ++++++++
>>>>    drivers/cpufreq/exynos4x12-cpufreq.c |   11 ++++-------
>>>>    3 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c
>>>> b/drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c
>>>> index f99cfe2..9aecffef 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c
>>>> @@ -17,6 +17,7 @@
>>>>    #include<linux/regulator/consumer.h>
>>>>    #include<linux/cpufreq.h>
>>>>    #include<linux/platform_device.h>
>>>> +#include<linux/of.h>
>>>>
>>>>    #include<plat/cpu.h>
>>>>
>>>> @@ -163,11 +164,24 @@ static int exynos_cpufreq_probe(struct
>>>> platform_device *pdev)
>>>>           if (!exynos_info)
>>>>                   return -ENOMEM;
>>>>
>>>> -       if (soc_is_exynos4210())
>>>> +       if (of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos4210")) {
>>>> +               exynos_info->type = EXYNOS_SOC_4210;
>>>> +       } else if (of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos4212")) {
>>>> +               exynos_info->type = EXYNOS_SOC_4212;
>>>> +       } else if (of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos4412")) {
>>>> +               exynos_info->type = EXYNOS_SOC_4212;
>>>
>>> 4412 ?
>>>
>> Yes, I will fix when I apply.
>>
>>>> +       } else if (of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos5250")) {
>>>> +               exynos_info->type = EXYNOS_SOC_5250;
>>>> +       } else {
>>>> +               pr_err("%s: Unknown SoC type\n", __func__);
>>>> +               return -ENODEV;
>>>> +       }
>>>> +
>>>> +       if (exynos_info->type == EXYNOS_SOC_4210)
>>>>                   ret = exynos4210_cpufreq_init(exynos_info);
>>>> -       else if (soc_is_exynos4212() || soc_is_exynos4412())
>>>> +       else if (exynos_info->type == EXYNOS_SOC_4212 ||
>>>> exynos_info->type == EXYNOS_SOC_4412)
>>>>                   ret = exynos4x12_cpufreq_init(exynos_info);
>>>> -       else if (soc_is_exynos5250())
>>>> +       else if (exynos_info->type == EXYNOS_SOC_5250)
>>>>                   ret = exynos5250_cpufreq_init(exynos_info);
>>>>           else
>>>>                   return 0;
>>>
>>> Do this in the first if/else only..
>>
>> Probably, you mean following in above?
>>
>>>> -       if (soc_is_exynos4210())
>>
>> I've applied this with fixing typo you mentioned just now, if any
>> concerns, please kindly let me know.
>
> I think Viresh meant merging the two if/else blocks together, as follows:
>
> 	if (of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos4210")) {
> 		exynos_info->type = EXYNOS_SOC_4210;
> 		ret = exynos4210_cpufreq_init(exynos_info);
> 	} else if (of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos4212")) {
> 		exynos_info->type = EXYNOS_SOC_4212;
> 		ret = exynos4x12_cpufreq_init(exynos_info);
> 	} else if (of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos4412")) {
> 		exynos_info->type = EXYNOS_SOC_4412;
> 		ret = exynos4x12_cpufreq_init(exynos_info);
> 	} else if (of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos5250")) {
> 		exynos_info->type = EXYNOS_SOC_5250;
> 		ret = exynos5250_cpufreq_init(exynos_info);
> 	} else {
> 		pr_err("%s: Unknown SoC type\n", __func__);
> 		return -ENODEV;
> 	}
>
Yeah, I just now realized same thing :(

looks better, the SoC type is only used for 4212/4412 in other place 
though...I will modify as per Viresh's suggestion.

Thanks,
Kukjin
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Rafael J. Wysocki May 19, 2014, 11:33 p.m. UTC | #9
On Saturday, May 17, 2014 01:04:29 AM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Friday, May 16, 2014 07:54:01 PM Kukjin Kim wrote:
> > Jonghwan Choi wrote:
> > > 
> > > Commit 7da83a80 ("ARM: EXYNOS: Migrate Exynos specific macros from plat to
> > > mach") which lands in samsung tree causes build breakage
> > > for cpufreq-exynos like following:
> > > 
> > > drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c: In function 'exynos_cpufreq_probe':
> > > drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:166:2: error: implicit declaration of
> > > function 'soc_is_exynos4210'
> > > [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > > drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:168:2: error: implicit declaration of
> > > function 'soc_is_exynos4212'
> > > [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > > drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:168:2: error: implicit declaration of
> > > function 'soc_is_exynos4412'
> > > [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > > drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:170:2: error: implicit declaration of
> > > function 'soc_is_exynos5250'
> > > [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > > cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
> > > make[2]: *** [drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.o] Error 1
> > > make[2]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
> > > drivers/cpufreq/exynos4x12-cpufreq.c: In function 'exynos4x12_set_clkdiv':
> > > drivers/cpufreq/exynos4x12-cpufreq.c:118:2: error: implicit declaration of
> > > function 'soc_is_exynos4212'
> > > [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > > cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
> > > make[2]: *** [drivers/cpufreq/exynos4x12-cpufreq.o] Error 1
> > > make[1]: *** [drivers/cpufreq] Error 2
> > > This fixes above error with getting SoC information via
> > > of_machine_is_compatible() instead of soc_is_exynosXXXX().
> > > 
> > 
> > Probably,
> > Suggested-by: Tomasz Figa ?
> > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Jonghwan Choi <jhbird.choi@samsung.com>
> > 
> > Looks better.
> > 
> > Rafael, if you have no objection on this, shall I pick this into samsung
> > tree for 3.16 because of the current build breakage with enabling exynos
> > cpufreq?
> 
> Please go ahead.

Actually, this conflicts with one patch already in my tree.  The resoultion
is quite obvious, but it would be better to avoid this conflict altogether.

Rafael

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Kim Kukjin May 20, 2014, 12:29 a.m. UTC | #10
Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> 
> On Saturday, May 17, 2014 01:04:29 AM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Friday, May 16, 2014 07:54:01 PM Kukjin Kim wrote:
> > > Jonghwan Choi wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Commit 7da83a80 ("ARM: EXYNOS: Migrate Exynos specific macros from
> plat to
> > > > mach") which lands in samsung tree causes build breakage
> > > > for cpufreq-exynos like following:
> > > >
> > > > drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c: In function 'exynos_cpufreq_probe':
> > > > drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:166:2: error: implicit declaration
> of
> > > > function 'soc_is_exynos4210'
> > > > [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > > > drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:168:2: error: implicit declaration
> of
> > > > function 'soc_is_exynos4212'
> > > > [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > > > drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:168:2: error: implicit declaration
> of
> > > > function 'soc_is_exynos4412'
> > > > [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > > > drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:170:2: error: implicit declaration
> of
> > > > function 'soc_is_exynos5250'
> > > > [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > > > cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
> > > > make[2]: *** [drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.o] Error 1
> > > > make[2]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
> > > > drivers/cpufreq/exynos4x12-cpufreq.c: In function
> 'exynos4x12_set_clkdiv':
> > > > drivers/cpufreq/exynos4x12-cpufreq.c:118:2: error: implicit
> declaration of
> > > > function 'soc_is_exynos4212'
> > > > [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > > > cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
> > > > make[2]: *** [drivers/cpufreq/exynos4x12-cpufreq.o] Error 1
> > > > make[1]: *** [drivers/cpufreq] Error 2
> > > > This fixes above error with getting SoC information via
> > > > of_machine_is_compatible() instead of soc_is_exynosXXXX().
> > > >
> > >
> > > Probably,
> > > Suggested-by: Tomasz Figa ?
> > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Jonghwan Choi <jhbird.choi@samsung.com>
> > >
> > > Looks better.
> > >
> > > Rafael, if you have no objection on this, shall I pick this into
> samsung
> > > tree for 3.16 because of the current build breakage with enabling
> exynos
> > > cpufreq?
> >
> > Please go ahead.
> 
> Actually, this conflicts with one patch already in my tree.  The
> resoultion
> is quite obvious, but it would be better to avoid this conflict altogether.
> 
Yeah. If you don't mind, shall I pick the patch (commit e5eaa445b0dc)into samsung tree with your ack?

Thanks,
Kukjin

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Patch
diff mbox

diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c
index f99cfe2..9aecffef 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c
@@ -17,6 +17,7 @@ 
 #include <linux/regulator/consumer.h>
 #include <linux/cpufreq.h>
 #include <linux/platform_device.h>
+#include <linux/of.h>
 
 #include <plat/cpu.h>
 
@@ -163,11 +164,24 @@  static int exynos_cpufreq_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
 	if (!exynos_info)
 		return -ENOMEM;
 
-	if (soc_is_exynos4210())
+	if (of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos4210")) {
+		exynos_info->type = EXYNOS_SOC_4210;
+	} else if (of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos4212")) {
+		exynos_info->type = EXYNOS_SOC_4212;
+	} else if (of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos4412")) {
+		exynos_info->type = EXYNOS_SOC_4212;
+	} else if (of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos5250")) {
+		exynos_info->type = EXYNOS_SOC_5250;
+	} else {
+		pr_err("%s: Unknown SoC type\n", __func__);
+		return -ENODEV;
+	}
+
+	if (exynos_info->type == EXYNOS_SOC_4210)
 		ret = exynos4210_cpufreq_init(exynos_info);
-	else if (soc_is_exynos4212() || soc_is_exynos4412())
+	else if (exynos_info->type == EXYNOS_SOC_4212 || exynos_info->type == EXYNOS_SOC_4412)
 		ret = exynos4x12_cpufreq_init(exynos_info);
-	else if (soc_is_exynos5250())
+	else if (exynos_info->type == EXYNOS_SOC_5250)
 		ret = exynos5250_cpufreq_init(exynos_info);
 	else
 		return 0;
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.h b/drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.h
index 3ddade8..f189547 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.h
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.h
@@ -17,6 +17,13 @@  enum cpufreq_level_index {
 	L20,
 };
 
+enum exynos_soc_type {
+	EXYNOS_SOC_4210,
+	EXYNOS_SOC_4212,
+	EXYNOS_SOC_4412,
+	EXYNOS_SOC_5250,
+};
+
 #define APLL_FREQ(f, a0, a1, a2, a3, a4, a5, a6, a7, b0, b1, b2, m, p, s) \
 	{ \
 		.freq = (f) * 1000, \
@@ -34,6 +41,7 @@  struct apll_freq {
 };
 
 struct exynos_dvfs_info {
+	enum exynos_soc_type type;
 	unsigned long	mpll_freq_khz;
 	unsigned int	pll_safe_idx;
 	struct clk	*cpu_clk;
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/exynos4x12-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/exynos4x12-cpufreq.c
index 466c76a..63a3907 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/exynos4x12-cpufreq.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/exynos4x12-cpufreq.c
@@ -100,7 +100,6 @@  static struct apll_freq apll_freq_4412[] = {
 static void exynos4x12_set_clkdiv(unsigned int div_index)
 {
 	unsigned int tmp;
-	unsigned int stat_cpu1;
 
 	/* Change Divider - CPU0 */
 
@@ -115,13 +114,11 @@  static void exynos4x12_set_clkdiv(unsigned int div_index)
 	tmp = apll_freq_4x12[div_index].clk_div_cpu1;
 
 	__raw_writel(tmp, EXYNOS4_CLKDIV_CPU1);
-	if (soc_is_exynos4212())
-		stat_cpu1 = 0x11;
-	else
-		stat_cpu1 = 0x111;
 
-	while (__raw_readl(EXYNOS4_CLKDIV_STATCPU1) & stat_cpu1)
+	do {
 		cpu_relax();
+		tmp = __raw_readl(EXYNOS4_CLKDIV_STATCPU1);
+	} while (tmp != 0x0);
 }
 
 static void exynos4x12_set_apll(unsigned int index)
@@ -184,7 +181,7 @@  int exynos4x12_cpufreq_init(struct exynos_dvfs_info *info)
 	if (IS_ERR(mout_apll))
 		goto err_mout_apll;
 
-	if (soc_is_exynos4212())
+	if (info->type == EXYNOS_SOC_4212)
 		apll_freq_4x12 = apll_freq_4212;
 	else
 		apll_freq_4x12 = apll_freq_4412;