From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751498AbdKHJLE (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Nov 2017 04:11:04 -0500 Received: from fllnx209.ext.ti.com ([198.47.19.16]:64547 "EHLO fllnx209.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750812AbdKHJK5 (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Nov 2017 04:10:57 -0500 Subject: Re: [RFT][PATCH v2 0/2] PM / QoS: Device resume latency framework fix To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Geert Uytterhoeven CC: Linux PM , LKML , Ulf Hansson , Reinette Chatre , Ramesh Thomas , Alex Shi References: <5770848.Kdi5IjVKeE@aspire.rjw.lan> <2520927.XkLgALY3I0@aspire.rjw.lan> <2157585.74BgekV60d@aspire.rjw.lan> From: Tero Kristo Message-ID: Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2017 11:09:48 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <2157585.74BgekV60d@aspire.rjw.lan> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-EXCLAIMER-MD-CONFIG: e1e8a2fd-e40a-4ac6-ac9b-f7e9cc9ee180 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 07/11/17 03:08, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Monday, November 6, 2017 2:46:48 PM CET Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: >> Hi Rafael, >> >> On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 12:42 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >>> On Thursday, November 2, 2017 12:00:27 AM CET Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >>>> This series is a replacement for commit 0cc2b4e5a020 (PM / QoS: Fix device >>>> resume latency PM QoS) that had to be reverted due to problems introduced by it. >>>> >>>> This time the genpd PM QoS governor is first updated to be more consistent >>>> and the PM QoS changes are made on top of that which simplifies the second >>>> patch quite a bit. >>>> >>>> This is based on the linux-next branch from linux-pm.git as of now (should >>>> also apply to the current mainline just fine). >>>> >>>> Please test if you can or let me know if you have any comments. >>> >>> The v2 removes a couple of redundant checks from the first patch (and add >>> comments to explain why the checks are not needed) and fixes up the >>> "no constraint" value collision with a valid constraint multiplied by >>> NSEC_PER_USEC in the second patch. >>> >>> Please test if possible and let me know about any issues. >> >> With this series, the 3 issues I reported before do not happen. >> >> Tested-by: Geert Uytterhoeven >> >> Thank you. > > Thanks! > > Rafael > The latest patches (#1 v3 and #2 v4) seem to work fine in my sanity tests also. Tested-by: Tero Kristo -- Texas Instruments Finland Oy, Porkkalankatu 22, 00180 Helsinki. Y-tunnus/Business ID: 0615521-4. Kotipaikka/Domicile: Helsinki