Re: [PATCH v10 17/27] drivers: firmware: psci: Prepare to support PM domains

From: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
To: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	Lorenzo Pieralisi <Lorenzo.Pieralisi@arm.com>,
	Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be>,
	Linux PM <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
	Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>,
	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
	linux-arm-msm <linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org>,
	Kevin Hilman <khilman@kernel.org>,
	"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Lina Iyer <ilina@codeaurora.org>,
	Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>,
	Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
	"Raju P . L . S . S . S . N" <rplsssn@codeaurora.org>,
	Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 17/27] drivers: firmware: psci: Prepare to support PM domains
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2018 08:15:05 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <66f0871e-fd1d-2f9a-13ce-1164c04e65ca@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPDyKFqdeSm56hVB+9dwJekNhZU10DE+-WaWa4m=wdUmjAdAdw@mail.gmail.com>

On 20/12/2018 22:37, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 at 19:06, Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> wrote:
>>
>> On 20/12/2018 16:49, Ulf Hansson wrote:
>>
>> [ ... ]
>>
>>>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_CPU_IDLE
>>>>
>>>> It would be nicer if you can remove the CONFIG_CPU_IDLE by replacing it
>>>> with a specific one (eg. CONFIG_PSCI_IDLE) and make it depend on
>>>> CONFIG_CPU_IDLE, so the config options stay contained in their
>>>> respective subsystems directory.
>>>
>>> I am all for simplifying the Kconfig options in here, as indeed it's
>>> rather messy. However, I would rather avoid folding in additional
>>> cleanup changes to this series, is already extensive enough.
>>>
>>> Would you be okay if we deal with that on top?
>>
>> IMO, there are patches in this series which can be grouped into a
>> cleanup + set the scene patchset and merged immediately. An option
>> similar to ARM_SCMI_POWER_DOMAIN can be part of it.
> 
> I certainly agree to that. The tricky is, to know what pieces people
> are happy with to go in. :-)
> 
> Earlier, in v9 I tried your suggested approach (kind of), but then
> Lorenzo stated that it's kind of all or nothing. Maybe we can bring up
> that discussion again with him and see what we can figure out.
> 
>>
>> However, if you swear you will do the change after and sign with your
>> blood, I'm fine with that 0:)
>>
> 
> Whatever it takes!
> 
> Anyway, as stated, the reason why I want to tackle that on top, is
> that I don't want to make the series more extensive than it already
> is.
> 
> Agree?

Yes

-- 
 <http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs

Follow Linaro:  <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog


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