From: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
To: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@armlinux.org.uk>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
linux-oxnas@groups.io, Marc Zyngier <Marc.Zyngier@arm.com>,
linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>,
David Brown <david.brown@linaro.org>,
Andy Gross <andy.gross@linaro.org>,
Linux-OMAP <linux-omap@vger.kernel.org>,
"open list:ARM/QUALCOMM SUPPORT" <linux-soc@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/9] ARM: qcom: remove unnecessary boot_lock
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2019 23:46:50 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CACRpkdbM7M7dcbhbw4BQBsbhUzfwy390srv7QBaygpz8WKaCBQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190111150935.GA4617@n2100.armlinux.org.uk>
On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 4:09 PM Russell King - ARM Linux
<linux@armlinux.org.uk> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 01:50:56PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 7:00 PM Russell King <rmk+kernel@armlinux.org.uk> wrote:
> >
> > > The boot_lock is something that was required for ARM development
> > > platforms to ensure that the delay calibration worked properly. This
> > > is not necessary for modern platforms that have better bus bandwidth
> > > and do not need to calibrate the delay loop for secondary cores.
> > > Remove the boot_lock entirely.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Russell King <rmk+kernel@armlinux.org.uk>
> >
> > Andy have you had a chance to test/apply this patch?
>
> I would rather folk do not _apply_ these patches - the final patch
> is dependent on all the preceeding patches, and if they're applied
> to individual trees, it will mean that the final patch has to be
> delayed by a complete kernel development cycle to avoid bisect
> breakage.
Ah good point. It's way better that you queue it up indeed.
Yours,
Linus Walleij
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
To: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@armlinux.org.uk>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
linux-oxnas@groups.io, Marc Zyngier <Marc.Zyngier@arm.com>,
linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>,
David Brown <david.brown@linaro.org>,
Andy Gross <andy.gross@linaro.org>,
Linux-OMAP <linux-omap@vger.kernel.org>,
"open list:ARM/QUALCOMM SUPPORT" <linux-soc@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/9] ARM: qcom: remove unnecessary boot_lock
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2019 23:46:50 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CACRpkdbM7M7dcbhbw4BQBsbhUzfwy390srv7QBaygpz8WKaCBQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190111150935.GA4617@n2100.armlinux.org.uk>
On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 4:09 PM Russell King - ARM Linux
<linux@armlinux.org.uk> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 01:50:56PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 7:00 PM Russell King <rmk+kernel@armlinux.org.uk> wrote:
> >
> > > The boot_lock is something that was required for ARM development
> > > platforms to ensure that the delay calibration worked properly. This
> > > is not necessary for modern platforms that have better bus bandwidth
> > > and do not need to calibrate the delay loop for secondary cores.
> > > Remove the boot_lock entirely.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Russell King <rmk+kernel@armlinux.org.uk>
> >
> > Andy have you had a chance to test/apply this patch?
>
> I would rather folk do not _apply_ these patches - the final patch
> is dependent on all the preceeding patches, and if they're applied
> to individual trees, it will mean that the final patch has to be
> delayed by a complete kernel development cycle to avoid bisect
> breakage.
Ah good point. It's way better that you queue it up indeed.
Yours,
Linus Walleij
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-01-13 22:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 56+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-12-13 17:59 [PATCH 0/9] Clean up ARM SMP/CPU hotplug implementations Russell King - ARM Linux
2018-12-13 17:59 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2018-12-13 17:59 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2018-12-13 18:00 ` [PATCH 1/9] ARM: omap2: remove unnecessary boot_lock Russell King
2018-12-13 18:00 ` Russell King
2018-12-13 18:00 ` [PATCH 2/9] ARM: qcom: " Russell King
2018-12-13 18:00 ` Russell King
2019-01-10 12:50 ` Linus Walleij
2019-01-10 12:50 ` Linus Walleij
2019-01-10 20:56 ` Stephen Boyd
2019-01-10 20:56 ` Stephen Boyd
2019-01-10 21:47 ` Linus Walleij
2019-01-10 21:47 ` Linus Walleij
2019-01-11 15:09 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2019-01-11 15:09 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2019-01-13 22:46 ` Linus Walleij [this message]
2019-01-13 22:46 ` Linus Walleij
2019-01-10 22:05 ` Stephen Boyd
2019-01-10 22:05 ` Stephen Boyd
2018-12-13 18:00 ` [PATCH 3/9] ARM: oxnas: remove CPU hotplug implementation Russell King
2018-12-13 18:00 ` Russell King
2018-12-20 14:03 ` Neil Armstrong
2018-12-20 14:03 ` Neil Armstrong
2018-12-13 18:00 ` [PATCH 4/9] ARM: sti: remove pen_release and boot_lock Russell King
2018-12-13 18:00 ` Russell King
2018-12-17 8:22 ` Patrice CHOTARD
2018-12-17 8:22 ` Patrice CHOTARD
2018-12-13 18:01 ` [PATCH 5/9] ARM: actions: remove boot_lock and pen_release Russell King
2018-12-13 18:01 ` Russell King
2018-12-13 18:01 ` Russell King
2018-12-13 18:01 ` [PATCH 6/9] ARM: vexpress/realview: consolidate immitation CPU hotplug Russell King
2018-12-13 18:01 ` Russell King
2018-12-13 18:01 ` Russell King
2018-12-13 18:01 ` [PATCH 7/9] ARM: versatile: convert boot_lock to raw Russell King
2018-12-13 18:01 ` Russell King
2018-12-13 18:01 ` Russell King
2018-12-13 18:01 ` [PATCH 8/9] ARM: versatile: rename and comment SMP implementation Russell King
2018-12-13 18:01 ` Russell King
2018-12-13 18:01 ` [PATCH 9/9] ARM: smp: remove arch-provided "pen_release" Russell King
2018-12-13 18:01 ` Russell King
2018-12-13 18:01 ` Russell King
2018-12-14 4:39 ` Viresh Kumar
2018-12-14 4:39 ` Viresh Kumar
2018-12-14 4:39 ` Viresh Kumar
2018-12-14 13:12 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2018-12-14 13:12 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2018-12-14 13:12 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2018-12-17 6:16 ` Viresh Kumar
2018-12-17 6:16 ` Viresh Kumar
2018-12-17 6:16 ` Viresh Kumar
2018-12-20 10:10 ` [PATCH 0/9] Clean up ARM SMP/CPU hotplug implementations Russell King - ARM Linux
2018-12-20 10:10 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2018-12-20 10:23 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2018-12-20 10:23 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2018-12-20 11:05 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2018-12-20 11:05 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CACRpkdbM7M7dcbhbw4BQBsbhUzfwy390srv7QBaygpz8WKaCBQ@mail.gmail.com \
--to=linus.walleij@linaro.org \
--cc=Marc.Zyngier@arm.com \
--cc=andy.gross@linaro.org \
--cc=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
--cc=david.brown@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-oxnas@groups.io \
--cc=linux-soc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=sboyd@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.