Re: [PATCH v9 0/2] pwrseq: introduce the subsystem and first driver

[Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@bgdev.pl>]

On Fri, Jun 21, 2024 at 11:04 AM Lk Sii <lk_sii@163.com> wrote:
>
> On 2024/6/21 14:36, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 21, 2024 at 3:14 AM Lk Sii <lk_sii@163.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 2024/6/20 22:30, patchwork-bot+bluetooth@kernel.org wrote:
> >>> Hello:
> >>>
> >>> This series was applied to bluetooth/bluetooth-next.git (master)
> >>> by Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org>:
> >>>
> >> Hi luiz,
> >>
> >> i am curious why Bartosz is able to merge his changes into bluetooth
> >> development tree bluetooth-next directly.
> >>
> >
> > This conversation is getting progressively worse...
> >
> >> 1)
> >> his changes should belong to *POWER* scope instead of *Bluetooth*
> >> obviously, however, there are *NOT* any SOB tag from either power and
> >> bluetooth maintainer. these changes currently only have below Acked-by
> >> and Signed-off-by tags:
> >>
> >> Acked-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>
> >> Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org>
> >>
> >
> > It's a new subsystem that has been discussed and reviewed for months
> > and thoroughly tested. Please refer to the cover letter under v8
> > linked in this thread. It's not related to power-management or
> > power-supply, it's its own thing but IMO the best place to put it is
> > under drivers/power/. And I will maintain it.
> >
> >> 2)
> >> his changes have not merged into linus mainline tree yet.
> >>
> >
> > This is why they are in next! They are scheduled to go in during the
> > upcoming merge window. But since changes belong in multiple trees, we
> > need a cross-tree merge.
> >
> >> 3)
> >> perhaps, it is safer to pull his changes from linus mainline tree when
> >> merged than to merge into bluetooth-next firstly.
> >>
> >
> > It's not safer at all, why would spending less time in next be safer?
> >
> it seems this patch serial(new subsystem) does not depend on bluetooth
> and also does not belong to bluetooth subsystem, but have been contained
> by tip of bluetooth tree.
>

It's the other way around: bluetooth changes (namely the hci_qca
driver) depend on the power sequencing changes.

> why not follow below merging produce?
> 1) you send this patch serials to Linus to merge within linus mainline tree
> 2) luiz then pull your changes from linus mainline tree.
>

I explained this in my previous email. Why would you want these
changes to needlessly wait for another release cycle? It makes no
sense. It's just a regular cross-tree merge like hundreds that are
performed every release.

> >>> On Wed,  5 Jun 2024 14:38:48 +0200 you wrote:
> >>>> From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org>
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi!
> >>>>
> >>>> These are the power sequencing patches sent separately after some
> >>>> improvements suggested by Bjorn Helgaas. I intend to pick them up into a
> >>>> new branch and maintain the subsystem from now on. I then plan to
> >>>> provide an immutable tag to the Bluetooth and PCI subsystems so that the
> >>>> rest of the C changes can be applied. This new branch will then be
> >>>> directly sent to Linus Torvalds for the next merge window.
> >>>>
> >>>> [...]
> >>>
> >>> Here is the summary with links:
> >>>   - [v9,1/2] power: sequencing: implement the pwrseq core
> >>>     https://git.kernel.org/bluetooth/bluetooth-next/c/249ebf3f65f8
> >>>   - [v9,2/2] power: pwrseq: add a driver for the PMU module on the QCom WCN chipsets
> >>>     https://git.kernel.org/bluetooth/bluetooth-next/c/2f1630f437df
> >>>
> >>> You are awesome, thank you!
> >>
> >
> > Why are you top-posting anyway?
> >
> it is caused by my bad mail client settings. thanks for reminder.
> > Bart
>

Luiz, Marcel: Am I wasting my time with this person? Is this another
Markus Elfring and I unknowingly got pulled into a nonsensical
argument?

Bart