They're already consistent but it saves remembering to do so.
Signed-off-by: Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Signed-off-by: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>
The header change has removed an implicit include of module.h, breaking
the build due to the use of THIS_MODULE. Fix that.
Signed-off-by: Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Signed-off-by: Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@windriver.com>
By extension from the 667MHz based clocks currently supported add 100MHz
and 200MHz operating points. Due to a lack of documentation these have not
been confirmed as supported but by extension from the existing frequencies
they should be OK, and I've given them quite a bit of runtime testing.
The major risk is synchronization with the non-ARM clocks but as we
can't currently scale the ARM PLL the risk should be relatively low.
Signed-off-by: Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Acked-by: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com>
Signed-off-by: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>
The CPUFREQ_POSTCHANGE notification is used to update things that depend on
the system clock rates. Since this may include the interfaces used to talk
to the regulators do the notification before we try to update regulators
to reflect lowered system clock rate.
The voltage scaling is just a power optimisation and may not happen at all
so there's no concern about it not having completed.
Signed-off-by: Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Acked-by: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com>
Signed-off-by: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>
At least some newer S3C6410 silicon supports operation up to 800MHz rather
than just 667MHz. Unfortunately I don't have access to any of documentation
of this other than some running systems, add a new cpufreq table entry for
this based on the behaviour of those systems.
Signed-off-by: Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Acked-by: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com>
Signed-off-by: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>
Mark Brown