From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A8C48C48BF6 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 2024 11:43:12 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References: Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=V30Ch1H7RfU9JCPCwobNFBluu3JIwLaIC3cQiy3qq6o=; b=DU2qT2TbEY1I96 Yk7k4tRdwfv+wL8ILSo2u4mfQS6o9RY726jvwtd9CRhTGDd3SmqSs6DUDGaxHM7M6atmliiND0bxx 4mqRfmDIRzE5G2MFQwsx3Lj5BFTmeZ8r3Q+BPq5Wn9CPA0ESJ2B4jHdpNDzls6cFY6lKOhUvUgw5H yACmMztF4RNyPP5ZtQqhDTG/DsZq551pI/GWMDXOb7aBeJ8HLZNIarAgkXjIF7YareH7KtfKSlfsl o6dy/LfX/AMtIHoYUy2PvLziIoXNGozXt0PTNTPAcy0RV2W5YUGdD5gs6WeIvcvtxOAOTM8fSAcI8 SigeOa+kZqT5q1VXs6rw==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.97.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1rh6ih-00000008rv9-2Ujl; Mon, 04 Mar 2024 11:42:59 +0000 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.97.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1rh6id-00000008ruP-2tCP for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 04 Mar 2024 11:42:58 +0000 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A77D51FB; Mon, 4 Mar 2024 03:43:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from bogus (e103737-lin.cambridge.arm.com [10.1.197.49]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 47FF73F738; Mon, 4 Mar 2024 03:42:46 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2024 11:42:43 +0000 From: Sudeep Holla To: Viresh Kumar Cc: Pierre Gondois , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Cristian Marussi , Christian Loehle , Sudeep Holla , Ionela Voinescu , Dietmar Eggemann , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] scmi-cpufreq: Set transition_delay_us Message-ID: References: <20240222135702.2005635-1-pierre.gondois@arm.com> <20240304070058.kfqg3ypssn5x6k7s@vireshk-i7> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20240304070058.kfqg3ypssn5x6k7s@vireshk-i7> X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20240304_034255_827243_EFE141CD X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 14.76 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Mon, Mar 04, 2024 at 12:30:58PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 22-02-24, 14:56, Pierre Gondois wrote: > > policy's fields definitions: > > `transition_delay_us`: > > The minimum amount of time between two consecutive freq. requests > > for one policy. > > `transition_latency`: > > Delta between freq. change request and effective freq. change on > > the hardware. > > > > cpufreq_policy_transition_delay_us() uses the `transition_delay_us` > > value if available. Otherwise a value is induced from the policy's > > `transition_latency`. > > > > The scmi-cpufreq driver doesn't populate the `transition_delay_us`. > > Values matching the definition are available through the SCMI > > specification. > > Add support to fetch these values and use them in the scmi-cpufreq > > driver. > > How do we merge this series ? I can only pick the last commit. I have sent my PR for v6.9 already and was deferring this to v6.10 The changes look good to me. If it doesn't conflict much with -next SCMI content, then I am happy to ack and you can take all of them together. Otherwise we can revisit strategy at -rc1. Thoughts ? -- Regards, Sudeep _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel