From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD6DAC433E6 for ; Mon, 15 Feb 2021 14:55:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A8F964E34 for ; Mon, 15 Feb 2021 14:55:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230003AbhBOOzL (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Feb 2021 09:55:11 -0500 Received: from mail-oi1-f177.google.com ([209.85.167.177]:46190 "EHLO mail-oi1-f177.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229907AbhBOOy7 (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Feb 2021 09:54:59 -0500 Received: by mail-oi1-f177.google.com with SMTP id f3so7924716oiw.13; Mon, 15 Feb 2021 06:54:43 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=9JKsmQvDQuJ7SXoDUysYvZz5JWsAqxGnNy9od5oFkcQ=; b=OMMaX64o4mPp15u74VK9VLMzv/sWOMuUdKE390rlvLWsr1E5JNtvy1v48K4DlcO3zl xRbVV0nosf41KFBPaxpSI2bb/O+UEhEydpP7hyZfTSK7ITrZNMbZk+gnOqMk6oJJpNHl RIM0sfy3uYIGJrWgysYrA9KQRpa8MdlQKtMOAZ6oAbzmb7w3m5rfwjo0c2dIIx0dJagC kqPr45NCoemRMyrtoFy/ifR9Z1z85Vo4laDvwy2EWkbXdUMaVU3msZZSK2TGyr+2JsMP Ca+EZkBLGWdelHRtu2ppQOueHgehleNmxGxRKaF6ZWMoxsj1yxhAnFEB+gDFBnUlGCzy nqag== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532SSmLStFb4E+2GGoYX6t7bNAJ9yTZ8yjEwLwbT0hDvslLVhmbB JHMBCBihOIYSSE/qUxIcEhHUyyCwwRwqWjHtxDk= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJz3NPKU0XxjlO97K+uOSpkRk9KXI05zuK6U5l7L2COytWxMtF1rAU//vQapJsGEIu2lu9WpFf7szKed1cuN/8Q= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6808:5cf:: with SMTP id d15mr8192480oij.69.1613400858625; Mon, 15 Feb 2021 06:54:18 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210211201703.658240-1-luzmaximilian@gmail.com> <898aa498-8256-d59f-9e72-0e1199b3a62a@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <898aa498-8256-d59f-9e72-0e1199b3a62a@redhat.com> From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2021 15:54:03 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] platform/surface: Add platform profile driver for Surface devices To: Hans de Goede Cc: Maximilian Luz , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Mark Gross , Len Brown , Mark Pearson , Jiaxun Yang , Platform Driver , ACPI Devel Maling List , Linux Kernel Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 3:36 PM Hans de Goede 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 > > 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. The extra stable branch wouldn't be necessary in that case. > Then I will pick up 4/4.