From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] Mailbox: Restructure and simplify PCC mailbox code Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2015 00:28:14 +0100 Message-ID: <1993436.YrcLMSCsYF@vostro.rjw.lan> References: <1422392638-31334-1-git-send-email-ashwin.chaugule@linaro.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Return-path: Received: from v094114.home.net.pl ([79.96.170.134]:52823 "HELO v094114.home.net.pl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751439AbbCLXE1 (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Mar 2015 19:04:27 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-pm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org To: Ashwin Chaugule Cc: "rwells@codeaurora.org" , Linda Knippers , "linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" , Catalin Marinas , Patch Tracking , Linaro ACPI Mailman List , Viresh Kumar , Jaswinder Singh , Mark Brown , Arnd Bergmann On Friday, February 13, 2015 07:01:30 PM Ashwin Chaugule wrote: > On 13 February 2015 at 18:31, Ashwin Chaugule > wrote: > > Hi Rafael, > > > > On 13 February 2015 at 09:38, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > >> On Friday, February 13, 2015 08:07:44 AM Ashwin Chaugule wrote: > >>> Hello, > >>> > >>> On 27 January 2015 at 16:03, Ashwin Chaugule wrote: > >>> > Previously the PCC driver depended on the client > >>> > side to map the communication space base address. This region > >>> > was was then used in the PCC driver and the client side. > >>> > The client side used this region to read and write its data > >>> > and the PCC driver used it to only write the PCC command. > >>> > Removing this split simplifies the PCC driver a lot. This patch > >>> > moves all communication region read/writes to the client side. > >>> > The PCC clients can now drive the PCC mailbox controller via the > >>> > mbox_client_txdone() method. > >>> > > >>> > Signed-off-by: Ashwin Chaugule > >>> > --- > >>> > drivers/mailbox/pcc.c | 122 +++++++++++++++----------------------------------- > >>> > 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 85 deletions(-) > >>> > >>> Gentle reminder for this patch specifically. It can be pulled in by > >>> itself separately from the CPPC patch[2/2], which understandably may > >>> need more time for review. Apart from the simplification done here, > >>> there is one more change based on a comment I got from Rafael tow > >>> convert a pr_err() in the init function to pr_debug(). The "PCC Probe > >>> failed" message seems to be raising false positives on X86 test > >>> reports. Please let me know if there are any other suggestions, before > >>> I respin another version for this. > >> > >> The patch changing the pr_err() to pr_debug() is in the Linus' tree already > >> as far as I can say. > > > > Thanks for that. > > > >> > >> Besides, this should be To: the maintainer of the mailbox susbsystem (not > >> me) or if you want me to pick it up, I need and ACK from that maintainer > >> anyway. > > > > Is there a way to do that separately for each patch in a patchset? > > Anyway, I'll rebase this patch to tip and send it separately To: > > Jassi. > > Rebasing to tip and applying this patch didnt cause any merge > conflicts. So I think instead of generating more patch traffic just > yet, its probably better to review this as is. Let me know if anyone > thinks otherwise. I'll try to ping Jassi offline. Can you please remind me what the status here is? Is this the final version I'm supposed to review or are you going to submit a new one? -- I speak only for myself. Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.