From: Samuel Holland <samuel@sholland.org>
To: "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
Cc: John Ogness <john.ogness@linutronix.de>,
Kai-Heng Feng <kai.heng.feng@canonical.com>,
Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>,
Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>,
YueHaibing <yuehaibing@huawei.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tangmeng <tangmeng@uniontech.com>,
Linux PM list <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Lorenzo Pieralisi <lpieralisi@kernel.org>,
Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
Dmitry Osipenko <dmitry.osipenko@collabora.com>,
Lee Jones <lee@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] firmware/psci: Switch to the sys-off handler API
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2023 21:32:00 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <e38d29f5-cd3c-4a2b-b355-2bcfad00a24b@sholland.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0a180849-ba1b-2a82-ab06-ed1b8155d5ca@collabora.com>
On 1/25/23 06:53, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
> On 1/1/23 21:17, Samuel Holland wrote:
>> I want to convert the axp20x PMIC poweroff handler to use the sys-off
>> API, so it can be used as a fallback for the SBI poweroff handler on
>> RISC-V. But the PSCI poweroff handler still uses pm_power_off, so done
>> alone, this conversion would cause the axp20x callback to be called
>> first, before the PSCI poweroff handler.
>>
>> In order to prevent this change in behavior, the PSCI poweroff handler
>> needs to be converted to the sys-off API first, at a higher priority.
>>
>> This series performs the conversion, after accounting for the fact that
>> the PSCI poweroff handler is registered quite early during boot.
>>
>> The first patch is a dependency for both this series and the SBI
>> series[1], so I would like to get at least patch 1 merged soon.
>>
>> [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20221228161915.13194-1-samuel@sholland.org/
>>
>> Changes in v2:
>> - Update commit messages
>>
>> Samuel Holland (2):
>> kernel/reboot: Use the static sys-off handler for any priority
>> firmware/psci: Switch to the sys-off handler API
>>
>> drivers/firmware/psci/psci.c | 9 ++++++---
>> kernel/reboot.c | 10 ++++------
>> 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>>
>
> Hello Rafael,
>
> Do you think you will be able to pick up this series for 6.3? I'm going
> to continue removing the pm_power_off from kernel, the new power-off API
> feels stable now to me. I think the Samuel's improvement for the early
> boot memory allocation will be good to have to avoid similar problem for
> other drivers.
>
> Ideally, the PSCI patch should get an ack, though the code change is
> about the PM stuff, so perhaps will be fine to take it via PM tree if FW
> maintainers will show no interest in the nearest time.
Additionally, a patch which depends on this[1] series has already been
merged[2], so if this series does not make 6.3, that change would need
to be reverted.
Regards,
Samuel
[1]:
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20221228162752.14204-1-samuel@sholland.org/
[2]: https://git.kernel.org/next/linux-next/c/a4755a1374ba
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-02-07 3:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-01-01 18:17 [PATCH v2 0/2] firmware/psci: Switch to the sys-off handler API Samuel Holland
2023-01-01 18:17 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] kernel/reboot: Use the static sys-off handler for any priority Samuel Holland
2023-01-01 18:17 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] firmware/psci: Switch to the sys-off handler API Samuel Holland
2023-01-25 16:50 ` Sudeep Holla
2023-01-25 12:53 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] " Dmitry Osipenko
2023-02-07 3:32 ` Samuel Holland [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=e38d29f5-cd3c-4a2b-b355-2bcfad00a24b@sholland.org \
--to=samuel@sholland.org \
--cc=dmitry.osipenko@collabora.com \
--cc=john.ogness@linutronix.de \
--cc=kai.heng.feng@canonical.com \
--cc=lee@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lpieralisi@kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=mcgrof@kernel.org \
--cc=pmladek@suse.com \
--cc=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com \
--cc=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
--cc=tangmeng@uniontech.com \
--cc=yuehaibing@huawei.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox