From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ulf Hansson Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/7] drivers: firmware: psci: Simplify state node parsing Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2019 14:43:01 +0100 Message-ID: References: <20190228135919.3747-1-ulf.hansson@linaro.org> <20190228135919.3747-6-ulf.hansson@linaro.org> <20190301172810.GR15517@lakrids.cambridge.arm.com> <20190306181519.GA3355@e107981-ln.cambridge.arm.com> <20190308114943.GA27731@e107981-ln.cambridge.arm.com> <20190308131723.GA30600@e107981-ln.cambridge.arm.com> <20190308133132.GB30600@e107981-ln.cambridge.arm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20190308133132.GB30600@e107981-ln.cambridge.arm.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Lorenzo Pieralisi Cc: Mark Rutland , "Rafael J . Wysocki" , Sudeep Holla , Daniel Lezcano , Lina Iyer , Linux PM , Linux ARM , linux-arm-msm , Linux Kernel Mailing List List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 8 Mar 2019 at 14:31, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 08, 2019 at 02:23:26PM +0100, Ulf Hansson wrote: > > On Fri, 8 Mar 2019 at 14:17, Lorenzo Pieralisi > > wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 08, 2019 at 02:07:51PM +0100, Ulf Hansson wrote: > > > > On Fri, 8 Mar 2019 at 12:49, Lorenzo Pieralisi > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 08, 2019 at 11:36:49AM +0100, Ulf Hansson wrote: > > > > > > > > > > [...] > > > > > > > > > > > Instead, my suggestion is according to what I propose in patch 4 and > > > > > > $subject patch, which means minor adjustments to be able to pass the > > > > > > struct cpuidle_driver * to the init functions. This, I need it for > > > > > > next steps, but already at this point it improves things as it avoids > > > > > > some of the OF parsing, and that's good, isn't it? > > > > > > > > > > I will take the patches Mark ACKed and send them for v5.2 as > > > > > early as it gets in v5.1-rc* cycle. > > > > > > > > Actually, may I suggest we funnel these through Rafael's tree, unless > > > > you are expecting other PSCI changes for v.5.2, which could cause > > > > conflicts? > > > > > > > > The reason is, other PM core changes, to genpd for example, needs to > > > > go via Rafael's tree. Those would then potentially block us for > > > > applying any other changes to your tree (arm-soc?) for PSCI (as there > > > > is dependency) until v5.3. > > > > > > > > How about if you provides your explicit acks for those PSCI changes > > > > your are happy with, then Rafael can pick them? > > > > > > It is fine we can do that, I would have not sent the patches Mark > > > has ACKed to arm-soc till -{rc2/rc3} anyway. > > > > Great! > > > > May I suggest you just reply to the cover-letter and provide the acks > > to the relevant patches, then I can then collect the received acks > > tags and re-post them to Rafael once rc1 is out. > > Mark ACKed the patches that we consider ready for upstream, tag them > and send them out at -rc1 there is nothing left to do on those. Right, I add your acks to them as well then. Thanks! Kind regards Uffe