On Tuesday, January 29, 2013 08:00:23 PM Viresh Kumar wrote:
On 29 January 2013 17:21, Rafael J. Wysocki rjw@sisk.pl wrote:
On Tuesday, January 29, 2013 10:09:59 AM Viresh Kumar wrote:
With the addition of following patch, related_cpus is required to be set by cpufreq platform drivers:
commit c1070fd743533efb54e98142252283583f379190 Author: Viresh Kumar viresh.kumar@linaro.org Date: Mon Jan 14 13:23:04 2013 +0000
cpufreq: Simplify cpufreq_add_dev()I've dropped this one in the meantime.
Can you please fold the $subject patch into "cpufreq: Simplify cpufreq_add_dev()" and post the result instead? That surely will be less confusing?
Okay. I will squash this one with cpufreq_add_dev() one + following line:
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/spear-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/spear-cpufreq.c index 8ff26af..fc714a6 100644 --- a/drivers/cpufreq/spear-cpufreq.c +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/spear-cpufreq.c @@ -189,7 +189,6 @@ static int spear_cpufreq_init(struct cpufreq_policy *policy) policy->cur = spear_cpufreq_get(0);
cpumask_copy(policy->cpus, topology_core_cpumask(policy->cpu));
cpumask_copy(policy->related_cpus, policy->cpus); return 0;}
Also, because you are happy loosing your commit history in linux-next, you can drop the patch that i have reverted as 2/2 of this set.
Well, I'm not attached to the linux-next commit history, but also it's a pain to change it too oftern. :-)
I generally avoid changing it unless there are build issues and such that would cause pain to people doing bisection, for example.
Thanks, Rafael