From: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org> To: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com> Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>, "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>, Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>, Lina Iyer <ilina@codeaurora.org>, Linux PM <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>, Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>, linux-arm-msm <linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/7] drivers: firmware: psci: Simplify state node parsing Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2019 14:07:51 +0100 [thread overview] Message-ID: <CAPDyKFry_ZQXA-bj6gA8npdqkMmg8AUOZ+Kr4mnOaS8=xZ+MwA@mail.gmail.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20190308114943.GA27731@e107981-ln.cambridge.arm.com> On Fri, 8 Mar 2019 at 12:49, Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 08, 2019 at 11:36:49AM +0100, Ulf Hansson wrote: > > [...] > > > Instead, my suggestion is according to what I propose in patch 4 and > > $subject patch, which means minor adjustments to be able to pass the > > struct cpuidle_driver * to the init functions. This, I need it for > > next steps, but already at this point it improves things as it avoids > > some of the OF parsing, and that's good, isn't it? > > I will take the patches Mark ACKed and send them for v5.2 as > early as it gets in v5.1-rc* cycle. Actually, may I suggest we funnel these through Rafael's tree, unless you are expecting other PSCI changes for v.5.2, which could cause conflicts? The reason is, other PM core changes, to genpd for example, needs to go via Rafael's tree. Those would then potentially block us for applying any other changes to your tree (arm-soc?) for PSCI (as there is dependency) until v5.3. How about if you provides your explicit acks for those PSCI changes your are happy with, then Rafael can pick them? > > For this one maybe you can post the changes on top and see what's > the best way forward ? > > I agree that duplicating idle state parsing code across back-ends > is silly - we just want to keep PSCI and kernel data structure > decoupled. Right. Let's continue this discussion later on and move forward here. Make sense. > > Post the code on top and we will find a way forward, OK ? Sure, let me do that. Thanks and kind regards Uffe
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org> To: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com> Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>, Linux PM <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>, linux-arm-msm <linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org>, Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>, "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Lina Iyer <ilina@codeaurora.org>, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>, Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/7] drivers: firmware: psci: Simplify state node parsing Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2019 14:07:51 +0100 [thread overview] Message-ID: <CAPDyKFry_ZQXA-bj6gA8npdqkMmg8AUOZ+Kr4mnOaS8=xZ+MwA@mail.gmail.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20190308114943.GA27731@e107981-ln.cambridge.arm.com> On Fri, 8 Mar 2019 at 12:49, Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 08, 2019 at 11:36:49AM +0100, Ulf Hansson wrote: > > [...] > > > Instead, my suggestion is according to what I propose in patch 4 and > > $subject patch, which means minor adjustments to be able to pass the > > struct cpuidle_driver * to the init functions. This, I need it for > > next steps, but already at this point it improves things as it avoids > > some of the OF parsing, and that's good, isn't it? > > I will take the patches Mark ACKed and send them for v5.2 as > early as it gets in v5.1-rc* cycle. Actually, may I suggest we funnel these through Rafael's tree, unless you are expecting other PSCI changes for v.5.2, which could cause conflicts? The reason is, other PM core changes, to genpd for example, needs to go via Rafael's tree. Those would then potentially block us for applying any other changes to your tree (arm-soc?) for PSCI (as there is dependency) until v5.3. How about if you provides your explicit acks for those PSCI changes your are happy with, then Rafael can pick them? > > For this one maybe you can post the changes on top and see what's > the best way forward ? > > I agree that duplicating idle state parsing code across back-ends > is silly - we just want to keep PSCI and kernel data structure > decoupled. Right. Let's continue this discussion later on and move forward here. Make sense. > > Post the code on top and we will find a way forward, OK ? Sure, let me do that. Thanks and kind regards Uffe _______________________________________________ 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:[~2019-03-08 13:07 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 68+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2019-02-28 13:59 [PATCH 0/7] drivers: firmware: psci: Some cleanup and refactoring Ulf Hansson 2019-02-28 13:59 ` Ulf Hansson 2019-02-28 13:59 ` [PATCH 1/7] drivers: firmware: psci: Move psci to separate directory Ulf Hansson 2019-02-28 13:59 ` Ulf Hansson 2019-02-28 13:59 ` Ulf Hansson 2019-02-28 14:34 ` Daniel Lezcano 2019-02-28 14:34 ` Daniel Lezcano 2019-03-01 17:03 ` Mark Rutland 2019-03-01 17:03 ` Mark Rutland 2019-02-28 13:59 ` [PATCH 2/7] MAINTAINERS: Update files for PSCI Ulf Hansson 2019-02-28 13:59 ` Ulf Hansson 2019-02-28 14:35 ` Daniel Lezcano 2019-02-28 14:35 ` Daniel Lezcano 2019-03-01 17:04 ` Mark Rutland 2019-03-01 17:04 ` Mark Rutland 2019-02-28 13:59 ` [PATCH 3/7] drivers: firmware: psci: Split psci_dt_cpu_init_idle() Ulf Hansson 2019-02-28 13:59 ` Ulf Hansson 2019-02-28 14:42 ` Daniel Lezcano 2019-02-28 14:42 ` Daniel Lezcano 2019-02-28 22:13 ` Ulf Hansson 2019-02-28 22:13 ` Ulf Hansson 2019-03-01 17:07 ` Mark Rutland 2019-03-01 17:07 ` Mark Rutland 2019-02-28 13:59 ` [PATCH 4/7] ARM/ARM64: cpuidle: Let back-end init ops take the driver as input Ulf Hansson 2019-02-28 13:59 ` Ulf Hansson 2019-02-28 15:30 ` Daniel Lezcano 2019-02-28 15:30 ` Daniel Lezcano 2019-03-01 17:31 ` Mark Rutland 2019-03-01 17:31 ` Mark Rutland 2019-02-28 13:59 ` [PATCH 5/7] drivers: firmware: psci: Simplify state node parsing Ulf Hansson 2019-02-28 13:59 ` Ulf Hansson 2019-02-28 15:40 ` Daniel Lezcano 2019-02-28 15:40 ` Daniel Lezcano 2019-02-28 22:26 ` Ulf Hansson 2019-02-28 22:26 ` Ulf Hansson 2019-02-28 22:41 ` Daniel Lezcano 2019-02-28 22:41 ` Daniel Lezcano 2019-03-01 17:28 ` Mark Rutland 2019-03-01 17:28 ` Mark Rutland 2019-03-04 10:14 ` Ulf Hansson 2019-03-04 10:14 ` Ulf Hansson 2019-03-06 18:15 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi 2019-03-06 18:15 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi 2019-03-08 10:36 ` Ulf Hansson 2019-03-08 10:36 ` Ulf Hansson 2019-03-08 11:49 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi 2019-03-08 11:49 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi 2019-03-08 13:07 ` Ulf Hansson [this message] 2019-03-08 13:07 ` Ulf Hansson 2019-03-08 13:17 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi 2019-03-08 13:17 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi 2019-03-08 13:23 ` Ulf Hansson 2019-03-08 13:23 ` Ulf Hansson 2019-03-08 13:31 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi 2019-03-08 13:31 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi 2019-03-08 13:43 ` Ulf Hansson 2019-03-08 13:43 ` Ulf Hansson 2019-02-28 13:59 ` [PATCH 6/7] drivers: firmware: psci: Simplify error path of psci_dt_init() Ulf Hansson 2019-02-28 13:59 ` Ulf Hansson 2019-02-28 13:59 ` [PATCH 7/7] drivers: firmware: psci: Announce support for OS initiated suspend mode Ulf Hansson 2019-02-28 13:59 ` Ulf Hansson 2019-03-01 17:28 ` Stephen Boyd 2019-03-01 17:28 ` Stephen Boyd 2019-03-01 17:28 ` Stephen Boyd 2019-03-04 10:25 ` Ulf Hansson 2019-03-04 10:25 ` Ulf Hansson 2019-03-01 17:32 ` Mark Rutland 2019-03-01 17:32 ` Mark Rutland
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='CAPDyKFry_ZQXA-bj6gA8npdqkMmg8AUOZ+Kr4mnOaS8=xZ+MwA@mail.gmail.com' \ --to=ulf.hansson@linaro.org \ --cc=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \ --cc=ilina@codeaurora.org \ --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \ --cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com \ --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \ --cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \ --cc=sudeep.holla@arm.com \ /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: linkBe 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.