From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F068F12FF98 for ; Mon, 26 Feb 2024 16:57:18 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.133.124 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1708966640; cv=none; b=C5JmgfGYRFDa7k82JhvwP/4DKCbxPxk+pKFWluTqCdAQT9GmVp2xAr4aQvK/bpGNWIz/iaRmY2uvyMsruHLtL9kZhxtzrdTUpWG/5vfmJzkaQr4RJM1Y4k1OktyifUFLHq1DyPO/EJI96F3Sl5u5P8PiZOvLmP9Y8qwLwgwEoPY= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1708966640; c=relaxed/simple; bh=eacWoILJZ5o5Viqax6eA9ePbWI2MSS3L3kVbV7kHxlw=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=ZI2GF6f15MItjAWiWqHJGwJoU2VsdJF6nzMC8W60ELY+Sy8VBu8XijKRKxit56yqeTztYcWGiKSE4WpEp4ei8wIIVT525kjLz6vk+HWW4EMh2UjOjOgOK1hGeqFUZ1Fqx0zG6OSSWMHWNPrzXSJvK6ZE63Bnt9c1yWNzT5mGDZ0= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b=KO8t39yh; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.133.124 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="KO8t39yh" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1708966637; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=8c+aIKxEaZpezL+jzlJ7u2FhDbslxiLJ7vzY5ObQAVg=; b=KO8t39yhjisGVpC0rb/yLWSQ3G6wD0jd0QYy/gykNupcjK9sbLAMYIBPO2C4YlURkcAF2N Qg5lrnBHTawNTD2re7CcDsm7zllxXqPbqMatKmY1SSXlLRKxoZgPiOnaCnOkRnlfHLK0mY lhK8E1VR93rmXlXs3AERlam2u9JTzx0= Received: from mail-lf1-f70.google.com (mail-lf1-f70.google.com [209.85.167.70]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-630-aLxPFy8aOWaruxbV1UnXZg-1; Mon, 26 Feb 2024 11:57:07 -0500 X-MC-Unique: aLxPFy8aOWaruxbV1UnXZg-1 Received: by mail-lf1-f70.google.com with SMTP id 2adb3069b0e04-512fe145c02so1302724e87.3 for ; Mon, 26 Feb 2024 08:57:05 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1708966623; x=1709571423; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:content-language :references:cc:to:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=8c+aIKxEaZpezL+jzlJ7u2FhDbslxiLJ7vzY5ObQAVg=; b=pvsrPV1MFwl6U7tkAjcB+j+CObbz5qwrCFCHJu54g8zpomf0i1yQuogGVAdRjSGnNP 6N9m1zgO9IpxO+4CdbNXljXs2Q9Gc+Ek+fOCMYc/55p5C4LgWpEm4lqvUx6nnfrgaMvA xT+6tongJBLdpJzFkj75OnLXUvti05x+rXAuFAQfENXPjE4W2rIE3EdzyeJTeoeAG7NR DTprD3KTPXOuZSt2kboEsTFgf3yKB9uDi6/Q6havmhnICHQSmHmBkI7k2kQP0vsEpmco rbx4b00r1B4ymbT0vcjtZkSU5Cr/xqZcJ4E5CRiGPitc1RD8reuahRDDUBsGYgwoRsBu WGiw== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCUcnDCKSmKGxwB07fjLk+5soCgUg16fkLH1DVoTwrLIvDzOfDLxMcakIBej3/fDS74HyvHJh14YeY73UmSSwiUy1SZs8tBBpnysqs8XabS6bCNWig== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxYh+v5Db7IHwowFG7Hfwc240Xx8zZdmrKKlOBZk4CRMKJd8Clp OjREXRiiKlh/1jZ2GjtxI/EqhZiuVwN7OSXuR0s5yv0jsixazvvQxMkFLEI7OdNr++ssX9nGa9y Si/W0C7cC4uaiBqKpS0XuLPf4W0d0BHHPj6uBPoVZJIT8rIza0OIeh5HApGqxXGcgs0yHufo= X-Received: by 2002:ac2:4288:0:b0:512:fdb3:7a9e with SMTP id m8-20020ac24288000000b00512fdb37a9emr1819836lfh.31.1708966623618; Mon, 26 Feb 2024 08:57:03 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IErYMtJMKxyV17XeAD60DbKw+SYc8okTK2r7tU7czsIcdBFoyqpwalN4Y46LherjciMy/pCzA== X-Received: by 2002:ac2:4288:0:b0:512:fdb3:7a9e with SMTP id m8-20020ac24288000000b00512fdb37a9emr1819819lfh.31.1708966623192; Mon, 26 Feb 2024 08:57:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?IPV6:2001:1c00:c32:7800:5bfa:a036:83f0:f9ec? (2001-1c00-0c32-7800-5bfa-a036-83f0-f9ec.cable.dynamic.v6.ziggo.nl. [2001:1c00:c32:7800:5bfa:a036:83f0:f9ec]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id tb16-20020a1709078b9000b00a42ea030a6esm2534364ejc.82.2024.02.26.08.57.02 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 26 Feb 2024 08:57:02 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2024 17:57:02 +0100 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] platform/mellanox: mlxbf-pmc: Fix module loading To: Luiz Capitulino , =?UTF-8?Q?Ilpo_J=C3=A4rvinen?= Cc: shravankr@nvidia.com, davthompson@nvidia.com, ndalvi@redhat.com, LKML , platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org References: <170895404513.2243.14840310263795846559.b4-ty@linux.intel.com> <29863354-4efe-d199-a9d4-7daf83f6cde9@linux.intel.com> <1608d86a-24e8-403b-b199-ce23f8411cfd@redhat.com> Content-Language: en-US, nl From: Hans de Goede In-Reply-To: <1608d86a-24e8-403b-b199-ce23f8411cfd@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hi Luiz, On 2/26/24 17:10, Luiz Capitulino wrote: > On 2024-02-26 11:04, Ilpo Järvinen wrote: >> On Mon, 26 Feb 2024, Luiz Capitulino wrote: >> >>> On 2024-02-26 08:27, Ilpo Järvinen wrote: >>>> On Thu, 22 Feb 2024 15:57:28 -0500, Luiz Capitulino wrote: >>>> >>>>> The mlxbf-pmc driver fails to load when the firmware reports a new but not >>>>> yet implemented performance block. I can reproduce this today with a >>>>> Bluefield-3 card and UEFI version 4.6.0-18-g7d063bb-BId13035, since this >>>>> reports the new clock_measure performance block. >>>>> >>>>> This[1] patch from Shravan implements the clock_measure support and will >>>>> solve the issue. But this series avoids the situation by ignoring and >>>>> logging unsupported performance blocks. >>>>> >>>>> [...] >>>> >>>> >>>> Thank you for your contribution, it has been applied to my local >>>> review-ilpo branch. Note it will show up in the public >>>> platform-drivers-x86/review-ilpo branch only once I've pushed my >>>> local branch there, which might take a while. >>> >>> Thank you Ilpo and thanks Hans for the review. >>> >>> The only detail is that we probably want this merged for 6.8 since >>> the driver doesn't currently load with the configuration mentioned above. >> >> Oh, sorry, I missed the mention in the coverletter. >> >> So you'd want I drop these from review-ilpo branch as there they end >> up into for-next branch, and they should go through Hans instead who >> handles fixes branch for this cycle? > > If that's the path to get this series merged for this cycle then yes, > but let's see if Hans agrees (sorry that I didn't know this before > posting). Hmm, new hw enablement typically goes through -next and not to the current fixes branch. And AFAICT this is new hw enablement, not a regression / bug-fix. Is there any special reason why this needs to be in 6.8 ? For RHEL kernels you can cherry-pick patches from -next as necessary. > One additional detail is that this series is on top of linux-next, which > has two additional mlxbf-pmc changes: > > * https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/39be055af3506ce6f843d11e45d71620f2a96e26.1707808180.git.shravankr@nvidia.com/ > * https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/d8548c70339a29258a906b2b518e5c48f669795c.1707808180.git.shravankr@nvidia.com/ Hmm, those are not small patches, any other reason why this really should go to -next IMHO. Regards, Hans