Re: [PATCH v4 0/3] pmdomain: ti_sci: collect and send low-power mode constraints

[Kevin Hilman <khilman@baylibre.com>]

Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com> writes:

> On 08:35-20241101, Kevin Hilman wrote:
>> Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com> writes:
>> 
>> > On 11:11-20241031, Ulf Hansson wrote:
>> >> On Wed, 30 Oct 2024 at 20:43, Kevin Hilman <khilman@baylibre.com> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org> writes:
>> >> >
>> >> > > On Wed, 30 Oct 2024 at 14:01, Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com> wrote:
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> Hi Kevin Hilman,
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> On Fri, 06 Sep 2024 09:14:48 -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote:
>> >> > >> > The latest (10.x) version of the firmware for the PM co-processor (aka
>> >> > >> > device manager, or DM) adds support for a "managed" mode, where the DM
>> >> > >> > firmware will select the specific low power state which is entered
>> >> > >> > when Linux requests a system-wide suspend.
>> >> > >> >
>> >> > >> > In this mode, the DM will always attempt the deepest low-power state
>> >> > >> > available for the SoC.
>> >> > >> >
>> >> > >> > [...]
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> I have applied the following to branch ti-drivers-soc-next on [1].
>> >> > >> Thank you!
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> Ulf, based on your ack[2], I have assumed that you want me to pick
>> >> > >> this series up. Let me know if that is not the case and I can drop the
>> >> > >> series.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Well, that was a while ago. The reason was because there was a
>> >> > > dependency to another series [2], when this was posted.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > If that's not the case anymore, I think it's better to funnel this via
>> >> > > my pmdomain tree. Please let me know how to proceed.
>> >> >
>> >> > The build-time dependency on [2] still exists, and since that was just
>> >> > queued up by Nishanth, I think this series should (still) go along with
>> >> > it to keep things simple.
>> >> >
>> >> > Kevin
>> >> 
>> >> Right, that makes perfect sense to me too. If we discover conflicts,
>> >> let's deal with them then.
>> >
>> >
>> > oops.. I missed this response. OK, I will let things be.
>> >
>> 
>> Oops, 0day bot found a build error in linux-next when CONFIG_PM_SLEEP is
>> not defined[1].  Need to respin to fix this.
>> 
>> v5 coming right up....
>> 
>> Kevin
>> 
>> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/CA+G9fYtioQ22nVr9m22+qyMqUNRsGdA=cFw_j1OUv=x8Pcs-bw@mail.gmail.com/
>
> Kevin,
>
> Unfortunately, I have chosen to drop the series. We are too late in
> the window to take the updated series and wait for new regression
> reports. On the flip side, this will clean up the flow for Ulf to take
> your V5 since the dependent series should ideally hit rc1 by then.
>
> Thanks for addressing the report fast.

OK, thanks Nishanth,

I'll work this series through Ulf's pmdomain tree for the next merge
window.

Kevin