From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 00/17] cpuidle for Marvell Armada 370 and 38x Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2014 00:18:38 +0200 Message-ID: <2328587.KMSy5tvnCr@vostro.rjw.lan> References: <1404913221-17343-1-git-send-email-thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com> <20140713222223.GH13108@titan.lakedaemon.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Return-path: Received: from v094114.home.net.pl ([79.96.170.134]:64933 "HELO v094114.home.net.pl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1752645AbaGPWAW (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Jul 2014 18:00:22 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20140713222223.GH13108@titan.lakedaemon.net> Sender: linux-pm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org To: Jason Cooper Cc: Thomas Petazzoni , Daniel Lezcano , linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Lunn , Sebastian Hesselbarth , Gregory Clement , Tawfik Bayouk , Nadav Haklai , Lior Amsalem , Ezequiel Garcia , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org On Sunday, July 13, 2014 06:22:23 PM Jason Cooper wrote: > Rafael, Daniel, > > On Wed, Jul 09, 2014 at 03:40:04PM +0200, Thomas Petazzoni wrote: > > Hello, > > > > Here comes the second version of the cpuidle support for Armada 370 > > and Armada 38x. This series has been tested on the following > > configurations: > > > > * Armada XP, LE and BE, to verify that the existing, SMP, cpuidle and > > CPU hotplug functionalities are still working. > > > > * Armada 375, Z1 and A0, LE and BE, to verify that the existing SMP > > functionality is still working (SMP support on Armada 375 Z1 is > > affected by this series). > > > > * Armada 370, LE and BE, to verify that the newly introduced cpuidle > > functionality is working fine. > > > > * Armada 38x, LE and BE, to verify that the existing SMP > > functionality, and the newly introduced cpuidle functionality is > > working fine. > > > > We are hoping to see this patch series merged for 3.17. > > > > Most patches are touching only arch/arm/mach-mvebu/ code so they > > should be handled by the mvebu maintainers. However, patches 11-14 are > > touching the mvebu cpuidle driver, with a possible issue on patch 11, > > which touches both the cpuidle driver and the mach-mvebu code in order > > to rename the driver without breaking functionality (if needed, we can > > decide to split the commits, it would break functionality temporarly, > > but not buildability). > > Would one or both of you mind Acking this series so we can keep it > together? While I don't see anything obviously wrong in it, I'd like Daniel to look at them too from the ARM perspective. Rafael