Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] JH7110 PMU Support

[Walker Chen <walker.chen@starfivetech.com>]

On 2023/1/17 3:19, Conor Dooley wrote:
> Hey Walker,
> 
> On Mon, Jan 16, 2023 at 03:42:56PM +0800, Walker Chen wrote:
>> Hello,
>> 
>> This patchset adds PMU (Power Management Unit) controller driver for the
>> StarFive JH7110 SoC. In order to meet low power requirements, PMU is
>> designed for including multiple PM domains that can be used for power
>> gating of selected IP blocks for power saving by reduced leakage
>> current. The first patch adds device tree binding for PM domain provider
>> and consumer. The second patch adds pmu driver and support JH7110 SoC.
>> The last patch adds device node about pmu to JH7110 dts. 
>> 
>> The series has been tested on the VisionFive 2 boards which equip with
>> JH7110 SoC and works normally.
> 
> For the series:
> Reviewed-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
> 
> I'm hoping that someone with knowledge of the power APIs will take a
> look now that the driver looks to be in a pretty good state (to my naive
> eyes at least).
> 
>> Changes in v3:
>> - Rebased on tag v6.1.
> 
> FYI, please pick something more recent than that.
> Ideally, the last -rc1, which in this case is v6.2-rc1.

OK, the next version will be rebased to the latest kernel. 

> It's helpful to do this, as when I went to apply your patch, there were
> some conflicts that needed to be sorted out. Because of your prerequisite
> patches, the usual `b4` commands would not usable. E.g.
> 
> b4 am -3 20230116074259.22874-1-walker.chen@starfivetech.com
> Analyzing 4 messages in the thread
> Checking attestation on all messages, may take a moment...
> ---
>   [PATCH v3 1/3] dt-bindings: power: Add starfive,jh7110-pmu
>   [PATCH v3 2/3] soc: starfive: Add StarFive JH71XX pmu driver
>   [PATCH v3 3/3] riscv: dts: starfive: add pmu controller node
> ---
> Total patches: 3
> Preparing fake-am for v3: JH7110 PMU Support
>   ERROR: Could not find matching blob for MAINTAINERS (85e8f83161d7)
>          If you know on which tree this patchset is based,
>          add it as a remote and perform "git remote update"
>          in order to fetch the missing objects.
> 
> Fortunately, this is just a driver addition so despite `b4` not
> helping it was easy to resolve but for other patches in the future,
> this may not be the case.
> 
> Assuming the dt maintainers are happy with the binding, ping me in 2
> weeks if no-one else has commented and I'll apply patches 1 & 2.

Could I drop patch 3 and rebase patch 1 & 2 on the latest mainline then submit as v4 ?

Best regards,
Walker