Re: [PATCH 2/2] cpufreq: brcmstb-avs-cpufreq: prefer SCMI cpufreq if supported

[Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>]

On 20-04-18, 09:50, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> On 04/20/2018 02:35 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > On 20-04-18, 10:15, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> >> It still doesn't give the flexibility to switch between the two
> >> implementations boot time based on some firmware config(e.g. DT status
> >> property).
> > 
> > I agree, but it didn't look like they need flexibility :)
> > 
> > Lets see how the intend to use it. If they are *always* going to use SCPI if
> > that is available, then it should be solved at Kconfig level only. Else they
> > shouldn't put such code in the driver to quit early.
> 
> We have both drivers (brcmstb-avs-cpufreq and scmi-cpufreq) enabled in
> our kernel configuration, however, depending on the firmware version, we
> may have a number of combinations:
> 
> - arm,scmi DT node is present and enabled (status = okay) as well as
> brcmstb-avs-cpufreq being present and enabled
> - arm,scmi DT node is present but disabled (status = disabled) and
> brcmstb-avs-cpufreq is being present and enabled

In this case the Kconfig thing I have been talking about doesn't apply anymore.

-- 
viresh