From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sudeep Holla Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 5/6] arm64: add support for ACPI Low Power Idle(LPI) Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2016 16:21:51 +0100 Message-ID: <577FC50F.7010205@arm.com> References: <1467911451-24731-1-git-send-email-sudeep.holla@arm.com> <1467911451-24731-2-git-send-email-sudeep.holla@arm.com> <1467911451-24731-3-git-send-email-sudeep.holla@arm.com> <1467911451-24731-4-git-send-email-sudeep.holla@arm.com> <1467911451-24731-5-git-send-email-sudeep.holla@arm.com> <1467911451-24731-6-git-send-email-sudeep.holla@arm.com> <20160708144719.GI3784@red-moon> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:43661 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932371AbcGHPVz (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Jul 2016 11:21:55 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20160708144719.GI3784@red-moon> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Lorenzo Pieralisi Cc: Sudeep Holla , ACPI List , "Rafael J . Wysocki" , Vikas Sajjan , Sunil , PrashanthPrakash , Al Stone , Ashwin Chaugule , Daniel Lezcano , LKML , ALKML , Mark Rutland On 08/07/16 15:47, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote: > On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 06:10:50PM +0100, Sudeep Holla wrote: >> This patch adds appropriate callbacks to support ACPI Low Power Idle >> (LPI) on ARM64. >> >> Cc: Lorenzo Pieralisi >> Cc: Mark Rutland >> Cc: Daniel Lezcano >> Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" >> Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla >> --- >> arch/arm64/kernel/cpuidle.c | 18 +++++++ >> drivers/firmware/psci.c | 122 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------- > > I would split this patch in two (ARM64 cpuidle and PSCI) Agreed, I combined it to get it functional in one go, but until we have 6/6, it won't work. So better to split that changes. > and for > the PSCI code (apologies, blame taken, it is entirely my fault) I > think that the code in v6 was better, I asked you to factor out > DT/ACPI idle states count and parameter retrieval but the end result > is much more complicated than what it was in v6, so for PSCI ACPI > idle states parsing I would revert to v6, apologies. > Yes I agree it got bit complicated. I will revert back to v6 for that part. > With changes above: > > Acked-by: Lorenzo Pieralisi > Thanks -- Regards, Sudeep