From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sudeep Holla Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 3/8] ACPI: Decouple ACPI idle and ACPI processor drivers Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2015 18:00:19 +0100 Message-ID: <55C0EFA3.2040006@arm.com> References: <55AD03F7.60108@arm.com> <55C0D156.9090808@arm.com> <55C0D7DC.2060709@arm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:59044 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752375AbbHDRAW (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Aug 2015 13:00:22 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Ashwin Chaugule Cc: Sudeep Holla , "rjw@rjwysocki.net" , "jaswinder.singh@linaro.org" , "linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" , "linaro-acpi@lists.linaro.org" , "patches@linaro.org" , "viresh.kumar@linaro.org" On 04/08/15 16:44, Ashwin Chaugule wrote: > On 4 August 2015 at 11:18, Sudeep Holla wrote: >> >> >> On 04/08/15 15:58, Ashwin Chaugule wrote: >>> >>> On 4 August 2015 at 10:51, Sudeep Holla wrote: >>>> >>>> On 03/08/15 18:40, Ashwin Chaugule wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 20 July 2015 at 10:21, Sudeep Holla wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> On 09/07/15 19:04, Ashwin Chaugule wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> In general, you need to split this series so that initially few patches >>>>>> deal with all the existing Kconfig fix-ups and then introduce >>>>>> PCC/PSS/CPPC related stuffs. That would help me rebase and test _LPI >>>>>> support. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Hm. I tried to maintain bisectability and make it easier for you to >>>>> rebase LPI patchwork too. Let me see if I can revisit now that I'm >>>>> back from vacation. :) >>>>> >>>> >>>> How about you just drop any idle related changes so that I will handle >>>> that to keep it simple. >>> >>> >>> Unfortunately I can't skip idle changes completely since it is tightly >>> coupled with the acpi_processor driver as well. >>> >> >> True, but only for ARM64 where we haven't enabled ACPI_PROCESSOR yet in >> mainline. So from that perspective, it should not cause any issue for >> keeping changes bisectable on x86/ia64. You can keep these idle changes >> locally for your testing. Trying to get everything at once will >> definitely be problematic IMO. > > Bisectability aside, without the idle changes to decouple it from > ACPI_PROCESSOR, the CPPC code will be non-functional. CPPC code has > been around for review publicly for almost a year and we need it to be > mainlined soon. So, given that we've converged on a solution for new > Kconfigs for Idle and PSS and that they're separate patches, why not > let it progress forwards as part of this series? > Sorry, I didn't mean to block this series in anyway. I was just thinking on how to post the preparatory changes to introduce _LPI. I prefer to base it on mainline rather than this patch series and hence I made that request. Regards, Sudeep