From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Simon Horman Date: Fri, 01 May 2015 01:09:10 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] PM / clock_ops: provide default runtime ops and cleanup users Message-Id: <20150501010909.GI13754@verge.net.au> List-Id: References: <553A6289.4040001@oracle.com> <20150428004618.GA1807@verge.net.au> In-Reply-To: <20150428004618.GA1807@verge.net.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 09:46:18AM +0900, Simon Horman wrote: > On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 04:51:03PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 4:41 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > On Thursday, April 23, 2015 02:03:08 PM Rajendra Nayak wrote: > > >> Most users of PM clocks do the exact same thing in runtime callbacks. > > >> Provide default callbacks and cleanup the existing users (keystone/davinci > > >> /omap1/sh) > > >> > > >> Rajendra Nayak (5): > > >> PM / clock_ops: Provide default runtime ops to users > > >> arm: keystone: remove boilerplate code and use USE_PM_CLK_RUNTIME_OPS > > >> arm: omap1: remove boilerplate code and use USE_PM_CLK_RUNTIME_OPS > > >> arm: davinci: remove boilerplate code and use USE_PM_CLK_RUNTIME_OPS > > >> drivers: sh: remove boilerplate code and use USE_PM_CLK_RUNTIME_OPS > > >> > > >> arch/arm/mach-davinci/pm_domain.c | 32 +------------------------- > > >> arch/arm/mach-keystone/pm_domain.c | 33 +------------------------- > > >> arch/arm/mach-omap1/pm_bus.c | 37 ++---------------------------- > > >> drivers/base/power/clock_ops.c | 38 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > >> drivers/sh/pm_runtime.c | 47 ++------------------------------------ > > >> include/linux/pm_clock.h | 10 ++++++++ > > >> 6 files changed, 54 insertions(+), 143 deletions(-) > > > > > > It is not particularly clear to me who is supposed to apply this series, but > > > I can do that if people don't have problems with that. > > > > All later patches depend on the first patch. > > > > For shmobile, Simon has queued up changes for drivers/sh/pm_runtime.c, > > but I think they don't conflict with this series. > > Yes, that is the case. I have some patches (from Geert) queued up for v4.1. > I have confirmed that they do not conflict with the shmobile (last) patch > if this series. > >
> The patches are in the sh-drivers-for-v4.1 branch of my renesas tree; I > rebased them yesterday; they should hit next today if there is a next > today; I plan to send a pull request to Linus in the not to distant future; > and I envisage they should end up in v4.1-rc2 or rc3. The above mentioned changes were tagged as renesas-sh-drivers-for-v4.1 in my renesas tree; were merged into in Linus's tree yesterday; and should thus be included in v4.1-rc2. I do not have any other changes to drivers/sh/pm_runtime.c pending at this time. >
> > On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 08:34:33AM -0700, santosh shilimkar wrote: > > On 4/24/2015 7:41 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > >On Thursday, April 23, 2015 02:03:08 PM Rajendra Nayak wrote: > > [snip] > > > >It is not particularly clear to me who is supposed to apply this series, but > > >I can do that if people don't have problems with that. > > > > > > > > I am fine by that given dependency with first patch. > > Another way is, you pick up the first patch and give us an > > immutable branch. > > > > Either way is fine by me. > > Likewise. > > Here is an ack for the shmobile (last) patch if you decide to take it > through your tree. > > Acked-by: Simon Horman > From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Simon Horman Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] PM / clock_ops: provide default runtime ops and cleanup users Date: Fri, 1 May 2015 10:09:10 +0900 Message-ID: <20150501010909.GI13754@verge.net.au> References: <553A6289.4040001@oracle.com> <20150428004618.GA1807@verge.net.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150428004618.GA1807@verge.net.au> Sender: linux-sh-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Geert Uytterhoeven , santosh shilimkar Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Rajendra Nayak , Santosh Shilimkar , Tony Lindgren , Kevin Hilman , Sekhar Nori , Magnus Damm , "linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , Linux PM list , "linux-omap@vger.kernel.org" , Linux-sh list List-Id: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 09:46:18AM +0900, Simon Horman wrote: > On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 04:51:03PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 4:41 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > On Thursday, April 23, 2015 02:03:08 PM Rajendra Nayak wrote: > > >> Most users of PM clocks do the exact same thing in runtime callbacks. > > >> Provide default callbacks and cleanup the existing users (keystone/davinci > > >> /omap1/sh) > > >> > > >> Rajendra Nayak (5): > > >> PM / clock_ops: Provide default runtime ops to users > > >> arm: keystone: remove boilerplate code and use USE_PM_CLK_RUNTIME_OPS > > >> arm: omap1: remove boilerplate code and use USE_PM_CLK_RUNTIME_OPS > > >> arm: davinci: remove boilerplate code and use USE_PM_CLK_RUNTIME_OPS > > >> drivers: sh: remove boilerplate code and use USE_PM_CLK_RUNTIME_OPS > > >> > > >> arch/arm/mach-davinci/pm_domain.c | 32 +------------------------- > > >> arch/arm/mach-keystone/pm_domain.c | 33 +------------------------- > > >> arch/arm/mach-omap1/pm_bus.c | 37 ++---------------------------- > > >> drivers/base/power/clock_ops.c | 38 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > >> drivers/sh/pm_runtime.c | 47 ++------------------------------------ > > >> include/linux/pm_clock.h | 10 ++++++++ > > >> 6 files changed, 54 insertions(+), 143 deletions(-) > > > > > > It is not particularly clear to me who is supposed to apply this series, but > > > I can do that if people don't have problems with that. > > > > All later patches depend on the first patch. > > > > For shmobile, Simon has queued up changes for drivers/sh/pm_runtime.c, > > but I think they don't conflict with this series. > > Yes, that is the case. I have some patches (from Geert) queued up for v4.1. > I have confirmed that they do not conflict with the shmobile (last) patch > if this series. > >
> The patches are in the sh-drivers-for-v4.1 branch of my renesas tree; I > rebased them yesterday; they should hit next today if there is a next > today; I plan to send a pull request to Linus in the not to distant future; > and I envisage they should end up in v4.1-rc2 or rc3. The above mentioned changes were tagged as renesas-sh-drivers-for-v4.1 in my renesas tree; were merged into in Linus's tree yesterday; and should thus be included in v4.1-rc2. I do not have any other changes to drivers/sh/pm_runtime.c pending at this time. >
> > On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 08:34:33AM -0700, santosh shilimkar wrote: > > On 4/24/2015 7:41 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > >On Thursday, April 23, 2015 02:03:08 PM Rajendra Nayak wrote: > > [snip] > > > >It is not particularly clear to me who is supposed to apply this series, but > > >I can do that if people don't have problems with that. > > > > > > > > I am fine by that given dependency with first patch. > > Another way is, you pick up the first patch and give us an > > immutable branch. > > > > Either way is fine by me. > > Likewise. > > Here is an ack for the shmobile (last) patch if you decide to take it > through your tree. > > Acked-by: Simon Horman > From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: horms@verge.net.au (Simon Horman) Date: Fri, 1 May 2015 10:09:10 +0900 Subject: [PATCH 0/5] PM / clock_ops: provide default runtime ops and cleanup users In-Reply-To: <20150428004618.GA1807@verge.net.au> References: <553A6289.4040001@oracle.com> <20150428004618.GA1807@verge.net.au> Message-ID: <20150501010909.GI13754@verge.net.au> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 09:46:18AM +0900, Simon Horman wrote: > On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 04:51:03PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 4:41 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > On Thursday, April 23, 2015 02:03:08 PM Rajendra Nayak wrote: > > >> Most users of PM clocks do the exact same thing in runtime callbacks. > > >> Provide default callbacks and cleanup the existing users (keystone/davinci > > >> /omap1/sh) > > >> > > >> Rajendra Nayak (5): > > >> PM / clock_ops: Provide default runtime ops to users > > >> arm: keystone: remove boilerplate code and use USE_PM_CLK_RUNTIME_OPS > > >> arm: omap1: remove boilerplate code and use USE_PM_CLK_RUNTIME_OPS > > >> arm: davinci: remove boilerplate code and use USE_PM_CLK_RUNTIME_OPS > > >> drivers: sh: remove boilerplate code and use USE_PM_CLK_RUNTIME_OPS > > >> > > >> arch/arm/mach-davinci/pm_domain.c | 32 +------------------------- > > >> arch/arm/mach-keystone/pm_domain.c | 33 +------------------------- > > >> arch/arm/mach-omap1/pm_bus.c | 37 ++---------------------------- > > >> drivers/base/power/clock_ops.c | 38 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > >> drivers/sh/pm_runtime.c | 47 ++------------------------------------ > > >> include/linux/pm_clock.h | 10 ++++++++ > > >> 6 files changed, 54 insertions(+), 143 deletions(-) > > > > > > It is not particularly clear to me who is supposed to apply this series, but > > > I can do that if people don't have problems with that. > > > > All later patches depend on the first patch. > > > > For shmobile, Simon has queued up changes for drivers/sh/pm_runtime.c, > > but I think they don't conflict with this series. > > Yes, that is the case. I have some patches (from Geert) queued up for v4.1. > I have confirmed that they do not conflict with the shmobile (last) patch > if this series. > >
> The patches are in the sh-drivers-for-v4.1 branch of my renesas tree; I > rebased them yesterday; they should hit next today if there is a next > today; I plan to send a pull request to Linus in the not to distant future; > and I envisage they should end up in v4.1-rc2 or rc3. The above mentioned changes were tagged as renesas-sh-drivers-for-v4.1 in my renesas tree; were merged into in Linus's tree yesterday; and should thus be included in v4.1-rc2. I do not have any other changes to drivers/sh/pm_runtime.c pending at this time. >
> > On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 08:34:33AM -0700, santosh shilimkar wrote: > > On 4/24/2015 7:41 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > >On Thursday, April 23, 2015 02:03:08 PM Rajendra Nayak wrote: > > [snip] > > > >It is not particularly clear to me who is supposed to apply this series, but > > >I can do that if people don't have problems with that. > > > > > > > > I am fine by that given dependency with first patch. > > Another way is, you pick up the first patch and give us an > > immutable branch. > > > > Either way is fine by me. > > Likewise. > > Here is an ack for the shmobile (last) patch if you decide to take it > through your tree. > > Acked-by: Simon Horman >