All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jia-Wei Chang <jia-wei.chang@mediatek.com>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>,
	"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
	Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
	Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@gmail.com>
Cc: <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>, <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	<linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org>, <fan.chen@mediatek.com>,
	<louis.yu@mediatek.com>, <roger.lu@mediatek.com>,
	<Allen-yy.Lin@mediatek.com>,
	<Project_Global_Chrome_Upstream_Group@mediatek.com>,
	<hsinyi@google.com>,
	Jia-Wei Chang <jia-wei.chang@mediatek.corp-partner.google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] dt-bindings: cpufreq: mediatek: transform cpufreq-mediatek into yaml
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2022 21:26:00 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <de1751bb13fb14b591fbe046ff274530ad62162e.camel@mediatek.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <96a823a2-f3b6-9fb7-c9d6-f1315f6056fd@kernel.org>

On Thu, 2022-03-24 at 11:33 +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 24/03/2022 10:38, Jia-Wei Chang wrote:
> > > 
> > > > 
> > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-
> > > > mediatek.yaml
> > > > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-
> > > > mediatek.yaml
> > > > new file mode 100644
> > > > index 000000000000..584946eb3790
> > > > --- /dev/null
> > > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-
> > > > mediatek.yaml
> > > > @@ -0,0 +1,131 @@
> > > > +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause)
> > > > +%YAML 1.2
> > > > +---
> > > > +$id: 
> > > > 
https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://devicetree.org/schemas/cpufreq/cpufreq-mediatek.yaml*__;Iw!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!xbKG4TgD0MRpMLyGJVBZEGpZFrNOclrcxOCx_APKo5Nmg8nF2x5PcBdE0unvL2NdpChkMA$
> > > >  
> > > > +$schema: 
> > > > 
https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml*__;Iw!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!xbKG4TgD0MRpMLyGJVBZEGpZFrNOclrcxOCx_APKo5Nmg8nF2x5PcBdE0unvL2O8T_oxCQ$
> > > >  
> > > > +
> > > > +title: Mediatek CPUFREQ driver Device Tree Bindings
> > > 
> > > Please remove "driver Device Tree Bindings" because the title
> > > should
> > > describe the hardware. Therefore it could be something like
> > > "Mediatek
> > > SoC CPU frequency and voltage scaling".
> > 
> > Thanks for your suggestion of title.
> > Or should I use the origin title "Binding for MediaTek's CPUFreq
> > driver"?
> 
> Mediatek CPUFREQ
> or
> Mediatek CPU frequency scaling

Ok, I will choose one of it.

> 
> > 
> > > 
> > > How is it related to cpufreq-mediatek-hw.yaml? The names/title
> > > look
> > > unfortunately too similar.
> > 
> > No, mediatek-cpufreq is performing in kernel driver rather than on
> > hardware.
> > On the other hand, mediatek-cpufreq-hw is performing on hardware.
> > That's why "hw" is present in its name.
> 
> Unfortunately, I do not get it. The bindings are only about hardware,
> so
> how bindings could be about CPU frequency scaling not in hardware?

Sorry, let me correct my statements.

For mediatek-cpufreq here, the required hardware are clock and
regulator which have to be under control of mediatek-cpufreq. That's
the reason why it needs bindings.

mediatek-cpufreq scales up and down voltage and frequency via kernel
framework of clock and regulator, however, mediatek-cpufreq-hw delegate
the voltage and frequency control to a hardware agent instead.

> 
> > 
> > > 
> > > In general this does not look like proper bindings (see also
> > > below
> > > lack
> > > of compatible). Bindings describe the hardware, so what is
> > > exactly
> > > the
> > > hardware here?
> > 
> > Except for SoC, there's no requirement of hardware binding for
> > mediatek-cpufreq.
> > mediatek-cpufreq recognizes the compatible of Mediatek SoC while
> > probing.
> 
> What is the hardware here? If there is no requirement for bindings
> for
> mediate-cpufreq, why do we have this patch here?

Sorry, that's my mistake.
Clock and regulator are required hardware for mediatek-cpufreq.

> 
> > 
> > > 
> > > > +
> > > > +maintainers:
> > > > +  - Jia-Wei Chang <jia-wei.chang@mediatek.com>
> > > > +
> > > > +description: |
> > > > +  CPUFREQ is used for scaling clock frequency of CPUs.
> > > > +  The module cooperates with CCI DEVFREQ to manage frequency
> > > > for
> > > > some Mediatek
> > > > +  SoCs.
> > > > +
> > > > +properties:
> > > 
> > > How is this schema going to be applied? I don't see here select
> > > neither
> > > compatible.
> > 
> > As mentioned above, only compatible of SoC is required for
> > mediatek-
> > cpufreq.
> 
> It does not answer my questions. How the schema is going to be
> applied?

Currently, we do use compatible of SoC to probe mediatek-cpufreq.

If the better way is using clock and regulator opp, do you have a
suggestion to approach that?
I mean I can't find a good example from other vendors trying to do that
way. Or maybe I miss something?

> 
> 
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jia-Wei Chang <jia-wei.chang@mediatek.com>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>,
	"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
	Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
	Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@gmail.com>
Cc: <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>, <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	<linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org>, <fan.chen@mediatek.com>,
	<louis.yu@mediatek.com>, <roger.lu@mediatek.com>,
	<Allen-yy.Lin@mediatek.com>,
	<Project_Global_Chrome_Upstream_Group@mediatek.com>,
	<hsinyi@google.com>,
	Jia-Wei Chang <jia-wei.chang@mediatek.corp-partner.google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] dt-bindings: cpufreq: mediatek: transform cpufreq-mediatek into yaml
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2022 21:26:00 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <de1751bb13fb14b591fbe046ff274530ad62162e.camel@mediatek.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <96a823a2-f3b6-9fb7-c9d6-f1315f6056fd@kernel.org>

On Thu, 2022-03-24 at 11:33 +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 24/03/2022 10:38, Jia-Wei Chang wrote:
> > > 
> > > > 
> > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-
> > > > mediatek.yaml
> > > > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-
> > > > mediatek.yaml
> > > > new file mode 100644
> > > > index 000000000000..584946eb3790
> > > > --- /dev/null
> > > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-
> > > > mediatek.yaml
> > > > @@ -0,0 +1,131 @@
> > > > +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause)
> > > > +%YAML 1.2
> > > > +---
> > > > +$id: 
> > > > 
https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://devicetree.org/schemas/cpufreq/cpufreq-mediatek.yaml*__;Iw!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!xbKG4TgD0MRpMLyGJVBZEGpZFrNOclrcxOCx_APKo5Nmg8nF2x5PcBdE0unvL2NdpChkMA$
> > > >  
> > > > +$schema: 
> > > > 
https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml*__;Iw!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!xbKG4TgD0MRpMLyGJVBZEGpZFrNOclrcxOCx_APKo5Nmg8nF2x5PcBdE0unvL2O8T_oxCQ$
> > > >  
> > > > +
> > > > +title: Mediatek CPUFREQ driver Device Tree Bindings
> > > 
> > > Please remove "driver Device Tree Bindings" because the title
> > > should
> > > describe the hardware. Therefore it could be something like
> > > "Mediatek
> > > SoC CPU frequency and voltage scaling".
> > 
> > Thanks for your suggestion of title.
> > Or should I use the origin title "Binding for MediaTek's CPUFreq
> > driver"?
> 
> Mediatek CPUFREQ
> or
> Mediatek CPU frequency scaling

Ok, I will choose one of it.

> 
> > 
> > > 
> > > How is it related to cpufreq-mediatek-hw.yaml? The names/title
> > > look
> > > unfortunately too similar.
> > 
> > No, mediatek-cpufreq is performing in kernel driver rather than on
> > hardware.
> > On the other hand, mediatek-cpufreq-hw is performing on hardware.
> > That's why "hw" is present in its name.
> 
> Unfortunately, I do not get it. The bindings are only about hardware,
> so
> how bindings could be about CPU frequency scaling not in hardware?

Sorry, let me correct my statements.

For mediatek-cpufreq here, the required hardware are clock and
regulator which have to be under control of mediatek-cpufreq. That's
the reason why it needs bindings.

mediatek-cpufreq scales up and down voltage and frequency via kernel
framework of clock and regulator, however, mediatek-cpufreq-hw delegate
the voltage and frequency control to a hardware agent instead.

> 
> > 
> > > 
> > > In general this does not look like proper bindings (see also
> > > below
> > > lack
> > > of compatible). Bindings describe the hardware, so what is
> > > exactly
> > > the
> > > hardware here?
> > 
> > Except for SoC, there's no requirement of hardware binding for
> > mediatek-cpufreq.
> > mediatek-cpufreq recognizes the compatible of Mediatek SoC while
> > probing.
> 
> What is the hardware here? If there is no requirement for bindings
> for
> mediate-cpufreq, why do we have this patch here?

Sorry, that's my mistake.
Clock and regulator are required hardware for mediatek-cpufreq.

> 
> > 
> > > 
> > > > +
> > > > +maintainers:
> > > > +  - Jia-Wei Chang <jia-wei.chang@mediatek.com>
> > > > +
> > > > +description: |
> > > > +  CPUFREQ is used for scaling clock frequency of CPUs.
> > > > +  The module cooperates with CCI DEVFREQ to manage frequency
> > > > for
> > > > some Mediatek
> > > > +  SoCs.
> > > > +
> > > > +properties:
> > > 
> > > How is this schema going to be applied? I don't see here select
> > > neither
> > > compatible.
> > 
> > As mentioned above, only compatible of SoC is required for
> > mediatek-
> > cpufreq.
> 
> It does not answer my questions. How the schema is going to be
> applied?

Currently, we do use compatible of SoC to probe mediatek-cpufreq.

If the better way is using clock and regulator opp, do you have a
suggestion to approach that?
I mean I can't find a good example from other vendors trying to do that
way. Or maybe I miss something?

> 
> 
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof


_______________________________________________
Linux-mediatek mailing list
Linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mediatek

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jia-Wei Chang <jia-wei.chang@mediatek.com>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>,
	"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
	Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
	Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@gmail.com>
Cc: <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>, <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	<linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org>, <fan.chen@mediatek.com>,
	<louis.yu@mediatek.com>, <roger.lu@mediatek.com>,
	<Allen-yy.Lin@mediatek.com>,
	<Project_Global_Chrome_Upstream_Group@mediatek.com>,
	<hsinyi@google.com>,
	Jia-Wei Chang <jia-wei.chang@mediatek.corp-partner.google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] dt-bindings: cpufreq: mediatek: transform cpufreq-mediatek into yaml
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2022 21:26:00 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <de1751bb13fb14b591fbe046ff274530ad62162e.camel@mediatek.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <96a823a2-f3b6-9fb7-c9d6-f1315f6056fd@kernel.org>

On Thu, 2022-03-24 at 11:33 +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 24/03/2022 10:38, Jia-Wei Chang wrote:
> > > 
> > > > 
> > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-
> > > > mediatek.yaml
> > > > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-
> > > > mediatek.yaml
> > > > new file mode 100644
> > > > index 000000000000..584946eb3790
> > > > --- /dev/null
> > > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-
> > > > mediatek.yaml
> > > > @@ -0,0 +1,131 @@
> > > > +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause)
> > > > +%YAML 1.2
> > > > +---
> > > > +$id: 
> > > > 
https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://devicetree.org/schemas/cpufreq/cpufreq-mediatek.yaml*__;Iw!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!xbKG4TgD0MRpMLyGJVBZEGpZFrNOclrcxOCx_APKo5Nmg8nF2x5PcBdE0unvL2NdpChkMA$
> > > >  
> > > > +$schema: 
> > > > 
https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml*__;Iw!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!xbKG4TgD0MRpMLyGJVBZEGpZFrNOclrcxOCx_APKo5Nmg8nF2x5PcBdE0unvL2O8T_oxCQ$
> > > >  
> > > > +
> > > > +title: Mediatek CPUFREQ driver Device Tree Bindings
> > > 
> > > Please remove "driver Device Tree Bindings" because the title
> > > should
> > > describe the hardware. Therefore it could be something like
> > > "Mediatek
> > > SoC CPU frequency and voltage scaling".
> > 
> > Thanks for your suggestion of title.
> > Or should I use the origin title "Binding for MediaTek's CPUFreq
> > driver"?
> 
> Mediatek CPUFREQ
> or
> Mediatek CPU frequency scaling

Ok, I will choose one of it.

> 
> > 
> > > 
> > > How is it related to cpufreq-mediatek-hw.yaml? The names/title
> > > look
> > > unfortunately too similar.
> > 
> > No, mediatek-cpufreq is performing in kernel driver rather than on
> > hardware.
> > On the other hand, mediatek-cpufreq-hw is performing on hardware.
> > That's why "hw" is present in its name.
> 
> Unfortunately, I do not get it. The bindings are only about hardware,
> so
> how bindings could be about CPU frequency scaling not in hardware?

Sorry, let me correct my statements.

For mediatek-cpufreq here, the required hardware are clock and
regulator which have to be under control of mediatek-cpufreq. That's
the reason why it needs bindings.

mediatek-cpufreq scales up and down voltage and frequency via kernel
framework of clock and regulator, however, mediatek-cpufreq-hw delegate
the voltage and frequency control to a hardware agent instead.

> 
> > 
> > > 
> > > In general this does not look like proper bindings (see also
> > > below
> > > lack
> > > of compatible). Bindings describe the hardware, so what is
> > > exactly
> > > the
> > > hardware here?
> > 
> > Except for SoC, there's no requirement of hardware binding for
> > mediatek-cpufreq.
> > mediatek-cpufreq recognizes the compatible of Mediatek SoC while
> > probing.
> 
> What is the hardware here? If there is no requirement for bindings
> for
> mediate-cpufreq, why do we have this patch here?

Sorry, that's my mistake.
Clock and regulator are required hardware for mediatek-cpufreq.

> 
> > 
> > > 
> > > > +
> > > > +maintainers:
> > > > +  - Jia-Wei Chang <jia-wei.chang@mediatek.com>
> > > > +
> > > > +description: |
> > > > +  CPUFREQ is used for scaling clock frequency of CPUs.
> > > > +  The module cooperates with CCI DEVFREQ to manage frequency
> > > > for
> > > > some Mediatek
> > > > +  SoCs.
> > > > +
> > > > +properties:
> > > 
> > > How is this schema going to be applied? I don't see here select
> > > neither
> > > compatible.
> > 
> > As mentioned above, only compatible of SoC is required for
> > mediatek-
> > cpufreq.
> 
> It does not answer my questions. How the schema is going to be
> applied?

Currently, we do use compatible of SoC to probe mediatek-cpufreq.

If the better way is using clock and regulator opp, do you have a
suggestion to approach that?
I mean I can't find a good example from other vendors trying to do that
way. Or maybe I miss something?

> 
> 
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

  reply	other threads:[~2022-04-01 13:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 75+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-03-07 12:21 [PATCH 0/4] cpufreq: mediatek: introduce mtk cpufreq Tim Chang
2022-03-07 12:21 ` Tim Chang
2022-03-07 12:21 ` Tim Chang
2022-03-07 12:21 ` [PATCH 1/4] dt-bindings: cpufreq: mediatek: transform cpufreq-mediatek into yaml Tim Chang
2022-03-07 12:21   ` Tim Chang
2022-03-07 12:21   ` Tim Chang
2022-03-07 18:57   ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2022-03-07 18:57     ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2022-03-07 18:57     ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2022-03-24  9:38     ` Jia-Wei Chang
2022-03-24  9:38       ` Jia-Wei Chang
2022-03-24  9:38       ` Jia-Wei Chang
2022-03-24 10:33       ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2022-03-24 10:33         ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2022-03-24 10:33         ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2022-04-01 13:26         ` Jia-Wei Chang [this message]
2022-04-01 13:26           ` Jia-Wei Chang
2022-04-01 13:26           ` Jia-Wei Chang
2022-04-01 16:32           ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2022-04-01 16:32             ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2022-04-01 16:32             ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2022-04-06  8:42             ` Jia-Wei Chang
2022-04-06  8:42               ` Jia-Wei Chang
2022-04-06  8:42               ` Jia-Wei Chang
2022-04-08  3:14             ` Rex-BC Chen
2022-04-08  3:14               ` Rex-BC Chen
2022-04-08  3:14               ` Rex-BC Chen
2022-03-07 12:21 ` [PATCH 2/4] dt-bindings: cpufreq: mediatek: add mt8186 cpufreq dt-bindings Tim Chang
2022-03-07 12:21   ` Tim Chang
2022-03-07 12:21   ` Tim Chang
2022-03-07 18:59   ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2022-03-07 18:59     ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2022-03-07 18:59     ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2022-03-24  9:42     ` Jia-Wei Chang
2022-03-24  9:42       ` Jia-Wei Chang
2022-03-24  9:42       ` Jia-Wei Chang
2022-03-24 10:35       ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2022-03-24 10:35         ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2022-03-24 10:35         ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2022-04-01 13:32         ` Jia-Wei Chang
2022-04-01 13:32           ` Jia-Wei Chang
2022-04-01 13:32           ` Jia-Wei Chang
2022-03-10 20:44   ` Rob Herring
2022-03-10 20:44     ` Rob Herring
2022-03-10 20:44     ` Rob Herring
2022-04-06 12:49     ` Jia-Wei Chang
2022-04-06 12:49       ` Jia-Wei Chang
2022-04-06 12:49       ` Jia-Wei Chang
2022-03-07 12:21 ` [PATCH 3/4] cpufreq: mediatek: clean up cpufreq driver Tim Chang
2022-03-07 12:21   ` Tim Chang
2022-03-07 12:21   ` Tim Chang
2022-03-07 19:02   ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2022-03-07 19:02     ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2022-03-07 19:02     ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2022-03-24  9:47     ` Jia-Wei Chang
2022-03-24  9:47       ` Jia-Wei Chang
2022-03-24  9:47       ` Jia-Wei Chang
2022-03-08  4:40   ` Viresh Kumar
2022-03-08  4:40     ` Viresh Kumar
2022-03-08  4:40     ` Viresh Kumar
2022-03-07 12:21 ` [PATCH 4/4] cpufreq: mediatek: add platform data and clean up voltage tracking logic Tim Chang
2022-03-07 12:21   ` Tim Chang
2022-03-07 12:21   ` Tim Chang
2022-03-07 19:03   ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2022-03-07 19:03     ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2022-03-07 19:03     ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2022-03-24  9:49     ` Jia-Wei Chang
2022-03-24  9:49       ` Jia-Wei Chang
2022-03-24  9:49       ` Jia-Wei Chang
2022-03-08  4:36 ` [PATCH 0/4] cpufreq: mediatek: introduce mtk cpufreq Viresh Kumar
2022-03-08  4:36   ` Viresh Kumar
2022-03-08  4:36   ` Viresh Kumar
2022-04-08  3:55   ` Rex-BC Chen
2022-04-08  3:55     ` Rex-BC Chen
2022-04-08  3:55     ` Rex-BC Chen

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=de1751bb13fb14b591fbe046ff274530ad62162e.camel@mediatek.com \
    --to=jia-wei.chang@mediatek.com \
    --cc=Allen-yy.Lin@mediatek.com \
    --cc=Project_Global_Chrome_Upstream_Group@mediatek.com \
    --cc=broonie@kernel.org \
    --cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=fan.chen@mediatek.com \
    --cc=hsinyi@google.com \
    --cc=jia-wei.chang@mediatek.corp-partner.google.com \
    --cc=krzk@kernel.org \
    --cc=lgirdwood@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=louis.yu@mediatek.com \
    --cc=matthias.bgg@gmail.com \
    --cc=rafael@kernel.org \
    --cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
    --cc=roger.lu@mediatek.com \
    --cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.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.