From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751879AbbLHQzH (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Dec 2015 11:55:07 -0500 Received: from mezzanine.sirena.org.uk ([106.187.55.193]:37858 "EHLO mezzanine.sirena.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751564AbbLHQzF (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Dec 2015 11:55:05 -0500 Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2015 16:54:56 +0000 From: Mark Brown To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: Liam Girdwood , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Tuomas Tynkkynen , Thierry Reding Message-ID: <20151208165456.GT5727@sirena.org.uk> References: <1983152.2iYiBkp4xd@wuerfel> <20151208163739.GS5727@sirena.org.uk> <18141514.YrJxqxh5jL@wuerfel> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="KqBSqvdnnccM6+Kg" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <18141514.YrJxqxh5jL@wuerfel> X-Cookie: revolutionary, adj.: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 94.175.94.161 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: broonie@sirena.org.uk Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: add regulator_sync_voltage inline dummy X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Mon, 26 Dec 2011 16:24:06 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mezzanine.sirena.org.uk) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --KqBSqvdnnccM6+Kg Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Tue, Dec 08, 2015 at 05:49:20PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Tuesday 08 December 2015 16:37:39 Mark Brown wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 08, 2015 at 04:43:35PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > We don't do this for *all* regulator API functions - there's some where > > using them strongly suggests that there is actually a dependency on the > > regulator API. This does seem like it might be falling into the > > specialist category... > Ok, got it. > I guess we'll want something like the patch below in the cpufreq git, right? Yes, exactly - though looking at the code I'm pretty unclear on what the authors think the use of _sync_voltage() is doing in the first place so it may be even better to just remove the call. It seems to have been included in the first commit so there's not changelog explaining things and there's no comment either. I'd *expect* it to be a noop as far as I can see. --KqBSqvdnnccM6+Kg Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJWZwtgAAoJECTWi3JdVIfQVngH/3r63oNnaw1ST1ulxjDwJsH1 nYu8T+Bdw/2AWyZ3AAR3rQ+VXpIah48HEL8j4O/1LrQ/8IEeuJ/DhlwKb03nYXFM mfqmLV0irlsPMRIFcpfRyiEjFdQtT3KnEMjdKXeQLsdZMHEyVAsGThwLnfrV2XTD TdGPGmLNXjQ26sK7ql9NVPCdT2XGh96zvIfMVexmttVYc2EhRTvtyGzj5+AfzbTm BPYJyvA4ttzHaA6zffLvJ7loxdS3ECR4kS019cXeBG7uqyVUDuB5bDVcbAA3qHND /Mj8/WF2r+K52Ccm7zWXEzLkHeN/dZu7RIogrlUcCBmKN9y4XcVA1bw9srFpOFw= =0LI2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --KqBSqvdnnccM6+Kg--