Of course.
W dniu 09.01.2017 o 10:58, Sudeep Holla pisze:
>
>
> On 07/01/17 00:44, Michał Zegan wrote:
>> seems the patch works as intended.
>>
>
> So, can we take this as
> Tested-by: Michał Zegan <webczat_...@poczta.onet.pl> ?
>
>> W dniu 06.01.2017 o 13:34, Sudeep Holla pisze:
>>> Currently we add the virtual cpufreq device unconditionally even when
>>> the SCPI DVFS clock provider node is disabled. This will cause cpufreq
>>> driver to throw errors when it gets initailised on boot/modprobe and
>>> also when the CPUs are hot-plugged back in.
>>>
>>> This patch fixes the issue by adding the virtual cpufreq device only if
>>> the SCPI DVFS clock provider is available and registered.
>>>
>>> Fixes: 9490f01e2471 ("clk: scpi: add support for cpufreq virtual device")
>>> Reported-by: Michał Zegan <webczat_...@poczta.onet.pl>
>>> Cc: Neil Armstrong <narmstr...@baylibre.com>
>>> Cc: Michael Turquette <mturque...@baylibre.com>
>>> Cc: Stephen Boyd <sb...@codeaurora.org>
>>> Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.ho...@arm.com>
> 
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
