Re: [PATCH v7 3/8] ACPI: Decouple ACPI idle and ACPI processor drivers

[Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>]

On 04/08/15 16:44, Ashwin Chaugule wrote:
> On 4 August 2015 at 11:18, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 04/08/15 15:58, Ashwin Chaugule wrote:
>>>
>>> On 4 August 2015 at 10:51, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 03/08/15 18:40, Ashwin Chaugule wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 20 July 2015 at 10:21, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> 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