From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jon Hunter Subject: Re: [PATCH V6 00/10] Add generic PM domain support for Tegra Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2016 13:32:32 +0000 Message-ID: <56DD82F0.2070504@nvidia.com> References: <1456501724-28477-1-git-send-email-jonathanh@nvidia.com> <20160302153556.GB21035@ulmo.nvidia.com> <7h7fhk3c4o.fsf@baylibre.com> <7h7fhkxn1r.fsf@baylibre.com> <56D8246E.5090909@nvidia.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <56D8246E.5090909@nvidia.com> Sender: linux-pm-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Kevin Hilman , "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Thierry Reding , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Stephen Warren , Alexandre Courbot , Ulf Hansson , Rob Herring , Pawel Moll , Mark Rutland , Ian Campbell , Kumar Gala , linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org, "linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" List-Id: linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org On 03/03/16 11:47, Jon Hunter wrote: > > On 03/03/16 03:22, Kevin Hilman wrote: >> "Rafael J. Wysocki" writes: >> >>> On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 8:36 PM, Kevin Hilman wrote: >>>> Thierry Reding writes: >>>> >>>>> On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 03:48:34PM +0000, Jon Hunter wrote: >>>>>> Adds generic PM domain support for Tegra SoCs but this series only >>>>>> enables support for it on Tegra 64-bit devices. There is no reason why >>>>>> this cannot be enable for Tegra 32-bit devices, but to keep the patch >>>>>> series to a minimum only 64-bit devices are enabled so far. >>>>>> >>>>>> This series has been boot tested on Tegra210 as well as various 32-bit >>>>>> Tegra platforms. >>>> >>>> [...] >>>> >>>>>> Jon Hunter (10): >>>>>> PM / Domains: Fix removal of a subdomain >>>>>> PM / Domains: Add function to get the last domain added >>>>>> PM / Domains: Add function to remove a pm-domain >>>>> >>>>> Ulf, Kevin, Rafael, >>>>> >>>>> It's too late to take these patches through the Tegra tree for v4.6, but >>>>> if Jon can get the above three patches ready before the merge window, >>>>> would you be willing to pick them up into your trees for v4.6? >>>> >>>> It's a bit late in the cycle, but since one is a fix and the other two >>>> add functions that aren't (yet) used, I think it would be fine to get >>>> them in for v4.6. But, the final decision is with Rafael. >>>> >>>>> Doing so >>>>> might make it easier to deal with the dependencies. The prerequisites >>>>> would already be in Linus' tree when I apply the Tegra bits for v4.7. >>>> >>>> Yeah, makes sense. >>>> >>>>> I don't mind taking all of it through the Tegra tree for v4.7, though. I >>>>> can provide a stable branch with the PM / Domains patches for you to >>>>> pull in, in case there are any conflicts. >>>> >>>> I think it makes the most sense for these prereqs to merge through >>>> linux-pm. Let's see what Rafael thinks about the timing. >>> >>> The timing is fine by me. >>> >>> Do you want me to apply [1-3/10] from this series, then? >> >> Jon has some minor tweaks to do, so he'll respin and then you can take >> them. >> >> Jon, feel free to add: >> >> Acked-by: Kevin Hilman >> >> For those as well. I thought I responded, but looks like I didn't. > > I am preparing a V7 that I will send out today/tomorrow (latest). I am > going to drop the removal parts for now and send that out separately as > an RFC because it is bigger than I have expected. Rafael, By the way, I posted the genpd fixes separately here [0][1]. Cheers Jon [0] http://marc.info/?l=linux-pm&m=145708892606515&w=2 [1] http://marc.info/?l=linux-pm&m=145708892606516&w=2