From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from foss.arm.com (foss.arm.com [217.140.110.172]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E17A43E5572; Tue, 5 May 2026 22:09:57 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.140.110.172 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1778018999; cv=none; b=Y1RRjkTDAR8BdRc4lTgQqsBAzxx9zyYFYv6akCEeYbcvSmm5rLJYu24DZJGJsCY/dFIFm0RIsP2kTdMMT2h9LsOShkIRVZZBLP3LI2L/Co7t+o6G6PSJPbOnFb/ZgloZ7JsnSCCvPHvdDBbb98Pnvr67gHnFzLLuLRfvYo9BQy8= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1778018999; c=relaxed/simple; bh=wngIzFQY61LFVz8abOPGp4EbGemyax42mCgJV6p6iPc=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=DPuT1IHqpmNVaUOWJjoqyvquxPZTHFD5w5TxjIkvfJoSkSi+SqKe/syFcCJNxwzS3/Ci8cZoBVu4/k+mb1vcklyOgQX9SIib6gctPsahVlZCSBj79S9z4RKoZ1gh78/Yr5m/EQ8Gq0F94SCRyWv1OnEd/jtIiFr1nr7jmHkqtYw= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=arm.com header.i=@arm.com header.b=We36GZ8M; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.140.110.172 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=arm.com header.i=@arm.com header.b="We36GZ8M" Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BC3A1A9A; Tue, 5 May 2026 15:09:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pluto (usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com [172.31.20.19]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7FEFA3F763; Tue, 5 May 2026 15:09:54 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=arm.com; s=foss; t=1778018996; bh=wngIzFQY61LFVz8abOPGp4EbGemyax42mCgJV6p6iPc=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=We36GZ8MM/yfvHjkDwIuTLTWBu69Uu4K483k5nWZL7vMfmQ4YB3opU2gB0AvBR5d6 NN4zIXVRJbTrS6+tKe/DoqCZiPBAsO1U8hnECuaDXL8f/wf8hC1ig3gcbooPpCFnIe n+DzMrjBVVl0hLAGiSJ9GiAfUunk0ZEi/NDbqseY= Date: Tue, 5 May 2026 23:09:47 +0100 From: Cristian Marussi To: Philip Radford Cc: Cristian Marussi , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, arm-scmi@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, sudeep.holla@arm.com, james.quinlan@broadcom.com, f.fainelli@gmail.com, vincent.guittot@linaro.org, etienne.carriere@st.com, peng.fan@oss.nxp.com, michal.simek@amd.com, quic_sibis@quicinc.com, dan.carpenter@linaro.org, d-gole@ti.com, souvik.chakravarty@arm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 09/12] firmware: arm_scmi: add Powercap MAI get/set support Message-ID: References: <20260428090922.346069-1-philip.radford@arm.com> <20260428090922.346069-10-philip.radford@arm.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Tue, May 05, 2026 at 10:44:05PM +0100, Philip Radford wrote: > On Tue, May 05, 2026 at 09:36:26PM +0100, Cristian Marussi wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 28, 2026 at 10:09:18AM +0100, Philip Radford wrote: > > > Add support for Power Measurement Averaging Interval (MAI) > > > > Hi, > > > > Hi, > Thanks for the review. > Helo, > > > get and set operations to the SCMI powercap protocol driver. > > > Extends scmi_powercap_info to store MAI configuration and > > > implement MAI get/set via xfer and optional fast-channel > > > support. [snip] > > > +static int scmi_powercap_xfer_mai_get(const struct scmi_protocol_handle *ph, u32 domain_id, > > > + u32 *mai) > > > > ..bad alignment and till now we try still to stick tpo 80cols in the SCMI > > stack if it does NOT really hamper readability... > > > > I will address this, but I'm quite certain it wasn't flagged by checkpatch. Oh yes..this is currently a convention we kept in the SCMI subsystem (the original 80 cols) BUT kernel wise this line length req was relaxed to 100cols a few years ago..so checkoatch will never flag it (not sure if it is configurable in such regards)... ... so you are excused :P ....anyway maybe Sudeep is fine to relax this...I dont have strong opinions BUT since all the stack is 80cols at this point... Thanks, Cristian