Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] platform/surface: Add platform profile driver for Surface devices

["Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>]

On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 4:22 PM Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 2/15/21 3:54 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 3:36 PM Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> On 2/11/21 9:16 PM, Maximilian Luz wrote:
> >>> This series adds a driver to provide platform profile support on 5th-
> >>> and later generation Microsoft Surface devices with a Surface System
> >>> Aggregator Module. On those devices, the platform profile can be used to
> >>> influence cooling behavior and power consumption.
> >>>
> >>> To achieve this, a new platform profile is introduced: the
> >>> 'balanced-performance' profile.
> >>>
> >>> In addition, a couple of fix-ups are performed:
> >>> - Hide CONFIG_ACPI_PLATFORM_PROFILE and change drivers so that it is
> >>>   selected instead of depended on.
> >>> - Fix some references to documentation in a comment.
> >>>
> >>> Note: This series (or more specifically "platform/surface: Add platform
> >>> profile driver") depends on the "platform/surface: Add Surface
> >>> Aggregator device registry" series.
> >>>
> >>> Changes in v2:
> >>>  - Introduce new 'balanced-performance' platform profile and change
> >>>    profile mapping in driver.
> >>>  - Perform some fix-ups for the ACPI platform profile implementation:
> >>>    - Fix some references to documentation in a comment.
> >>>    - Hide CONFIG_ACPI_PLATFORM_PROFILE
> >>
> >> Thanks, the entire series looks good to me, so for the series:
> >>
> >> Reviewed-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
> >>
> >> Rafael, can you (once 5.12-rc1 is out) pick 1-3/4 and then provide a
> >> stable branch for me to merge?
> >
> > Since [1-3/4] appear to be uncontroversial, so IMO it would be better
> > to merge them during the merge window, so they are present in
> > 5.12-rc1.
>
> So I just realized one problem with this plan, patch 1/4 depends
> on (modifies) Kconfig bits which are only in my tree / my 5.12 pull-req
> (which I send out earlier today).

That should be fine.

I will be sending the first batch of pull requests tomorrow.  Then I
will wait for them to be merged and I will merge the mainline back at
that point.  The new patches will be applied on top of that merge, so
if your 5.12 material is included in it, they should build without
problems.