Re: [PATCH v4 0/3] pmdomain: ti_sci: collect and send low-power mode constraints

[Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com>]

On 08:35-20241101, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com> writes:
> 
> > On 11:11-20241031, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> >> On Wed, 30 Oct 2024 at 20:43, Kevin Hilman <khilman@baylibre.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org> writes:
> >> >
> >> > > On Wed, 30 Oct 2024 at 14:01, Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com> wrote:
> >> > >>
> >> > >> Hi Kevin Hilman,
> >> > >>
> >> > >> On Fri, 06 Sep 2024 09:14:48 -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> >> > >> > The latest (10.x) version of the firmware for the PM co-processor (aka
> >> > >> > device manager, or DM) adds support for a "managed" mode, where the DM
> >> > >> > firmware will select the specific low power state which is entered
> >> > >> > when Linux requests a system-wide suspend.
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > In this mode, the DM will always attempt the deepest low-power state
> >> > >> > available for the SoC.
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > [...]
> >> > >>
> >> > >> I have applied the following to branch ti-drivers-soc-next on [1].
> >> > >> Thank you!
> >> > >>
> >> > >> Ulf, based on your ack[2], I have assumed that you want me to pick
> >> > >> this series up. Let me know if that is not the case and I can drop the
> >> > >> series.
> >> > >
> >> > > Well, that was a while ago. The reason was because there was a
> >> > > dependency to another series [2], when this was posted.
> >> > >
> >> > > If that's not the case anymore, I think it's better to funnel this via
> >> > > my pmdomain tree. Please let me know how to proceed.
> >> >
> >> > The build-time dependency on [2] still exists, and since that was just
> >> > queued up by Nishanth, I think this series should (still) go along with
> >> > it to keep things simple.
> >> >
> >> > Kevin
> >> 
> >> Right, that makes perfect sense to me too. If we discover conflicts,
> >> let's deal with them then.
> >
> >
> > oops.. I missed this response. OK, I will let things be.
> >
> 
> Oops, 0day bot found a build error in linux-next when CONFIG_PM_SLEEP is
> not defined[1].  Need to respin to fix this.
> 
> v5 coming right up....
> 
> Kevin
> 
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/CA+G9fYtioQ22nVr9m22+qyMqUNRsGdA=cFw_j1OUv=x8Pcs-bw@mail.gmail.com/

Kevin,

Unfortunately, I have chosen to drop the series. We are too late in
the window to take the updated series and wait for new regression
reports. On the flip side, this will clean up the flow for Ulf to take
your V5 since the dependent series should ideally hit rc1 by then.

Thanks for addressing the report fast.

-- 
Regards,
Nishanth Menon
Key (0xDDB5849D1736249D) / Fingerprint: F8A2 8693 54EB 8232 17A3  1A34 DDB5 849D 1736 249D