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 0EEA8327C09
	for <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>; Fri,  3 Jul 2026 04:15:36 +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=1783052152; cv=none; b=UltwRgODQUiX9tvswhHk5x0Ukk7P1GsLrHnElc+3ZB5VZEiB4VGM9oaylpilg6NZOLYFKUn1HKuUwosXkkQOATcRCRO8MmbxA4jxxy2+pqLQxAs+985Layeyw5VZZiRuBGU1EY/Z08/GmGsX/VyRgGFpAGpApedW8Od1YgY5i78=
ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org;
	s=arc-20240116; t=1783052152; c=relaxed/simple;
	bh=Cv1M8RLns4cnjAKC5PLIZHRwEpWpgR5Rv0tWEf0CiNk=;
	h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version:
	 Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=L841ijjm9flJK4pUuFIQjXRnMm2XAOGk2xsOBqg1d6Szo0rBmwZm1Q6/Kix8y+jr3GJcXmEEWW6AbMaYj8lZeBn9zn0VVNE5jxH+xr3VA40nFB4GzHKv7c+8oIGM6sQ2q07UE13O9PAdW39csRe9Ivc3Dqb7iVeRuWW7SiJHttM=
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=Jtd+3L8S; 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="Jtd+3L8S"
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 73EC31D34;
	Thu,  2 Jul 2026 21:15:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (a079125.arm.com [10.164.21.37])
	by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1C4FD3F905;
	Thu,  2 Jul 2026 21:15:33 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=arm.com; s=foss;
	t=1783052134; bh=Cv1M8RLns4cnjAKC5PLIZHRwEpWpgR5Rv0tWEf0CiNk=;
	h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From;
	b=Jtd+3L8SFs4vs7dUAtjNF1Dm5tEThzzxXGWKjZSU/6mjF/rKbvHnzVWXnWAyp5Pxz
	 s/iTtQMbjTFqKKsNJ0of0fMHf2QdpTnwHEezneA66m7qoFpWe/q6ThF+GP0tuGeFcb
	 84kXgNLOAEQ8oQ3XwZimJNVbksQRhdXDFosvXwUc=
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2026 09:45:31 +0530
From: Linu Cherian <linu.cherian@arm.com>
To: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@arm.com>,
	Kevin Brodsky <kevin.brodsky@arm.com>,
	Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] Add BBML3 cpu feature
Message-ID: <akc3Y44XLqY3ZaEX@a079125.arm.com>
References: <20260701094131.677636-1-linu.cherian@arm.com>
 <830a4d39-c829-4e79-a0ec-5a3633b58aa6@arm.com>
 <akcpqX8gpduwqtOg@a079125.arm.com>
Precedence: bulk
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:linux-kernel+subscribe@vger.kernel.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:linux-kernel+unsubscribe@vger.kernel.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <akcpqX8gpduwqtOg@a079125.arm.com>

Hi Suzuki,

On Fri, Jul 03, 2026 at 08:47:01AM +0530, Linu Cherian wrote:
> Hi Suzuki,
> 
> On Wed, Jul 01, 2026 at 11:11:35AM +0100, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
> > On 01/07/2026 10:41, Linu Cherian wrote:
> > > Patches 1 and 2 introduces BBML3 cpu feature
> > > Patches 3, 4 and 5 adds more cpus to the BBML3 support list,
> > > 	which dont advertise themselves through the standard
> > > 	MMFR2_ID registers.
> > > 
> > > Linu Cherian (5):
> > >    arm64: cpufeature: Add BBML3
> > >    arm64: cpufeature: Detect BBML3 based on MMFR2 ID
> > 
> > 
> > >    arm64: cputype: Add Cortex-A520AE definitions
> > >    arm64: cputype: Add C1-Nano definitions
> > >    arm64: cpufeature: Extend bbml3 support list
> > 
> > If you could move the last 3 patches to the top, would be easier
> > for people to back port the "enable" BBLM3 for those CPUs, without
> > the renaming conflicts.
> > 
> 
> IMHO, if we change the order, "arm64: cpufeature: Extend bbml3 support list"
> title need to be tweaked and might not go well with this BBML3 support series.
> Also, backporting issue wouldnt be a problem if the whole series is
> backported and not just 3 patches in isolation ?
> 

After looking further on this, i definitely agree that moving those patches up has an
advantage, w.r.t avoiding dependency on other patches.

Thanks,
Linu Cherian.