[PATCH v8 6/8] drivers: cpuidle: CPU idle ARM64 driver

[Daniel Lezcano]

On 09/11/2014 10:57 AM, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 09:28:06AM +0100, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>> On 09/05/2014 05:34 PM, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
>>> On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 10:21:20AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 06:29:10PM +0100, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 05:03:20PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 03, 2014 at 06:37:40PM +0100, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
>>>>>>> This patch should be ready to go too, is it ok if I split the series
>>>>>>> in arm64 arch specific patches (will ask Catalin to pull) and CPUidle ones
>>>>>>> (inclusive of DT bindings and !!this patch!!) and send two separate pull
>>>>>>> requests ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If Daniel/Rafael don't have any objection, I can take the whole series
>>>>>> through the arm64 tree (it seems that patches have been already acked by
>>>>>> Daniel).
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks a lot Catalin. Since this one is a brand new CPUidle driver and it
>>>>> follows a different pattern from arm legacy drivers I would like to get
>>>>> Daniel's ack on this patch too before pushing it. For the records I have
>>>>> just added two pr_err to signal driver probing error, ultraminor changes
>>>>> that do not justify a repost.
>>>>>
>>>>> If Samsung guys do not manifest themselves I would drop patch 8 from
>>>>> the series till it gets tested and its patch dependency queued too.
>>>>
>>>> The last patch also has a dependency, as you mentioned to Daniel. I think
>>>> we can certainly merge the arm64 parts, and if Daniel doesn't object, then
>>>> we can take the driver stuff too but leaving the exynos bits out (i.e. drop
>>>> the last patch).
>>>>
>>>> Anyway, if you could repost with the acks you've collected and rearrange it
>>>> so the arm64 patches are first in the series, that would be great.
>>>
>>> I can repost it with the acks and rearrange the patches, but for the
>>> pull request I have to know what code can be merged, since there are
>>> some arm64 patches (PSCI and CPUidle arm64 back-end) that are strictly
>>> tied to the arm64 CPUidle driver, so I *have* to know if the arm64
>>> CPUidle driver (this patch) can get merged and that requires an ack.
>>>
>>> If I do not hear from Samsung guys I will drop patch 8.
>>
>> Well I would prefer to have this patch merged (Cc'ing Tomasz).
>
> Ok, but:
>
> a) I only compile tested it
> b) There is a dts patch dependency for patch 8 to apply cleanly and it
>     hasn't been acked (I can't really do it since I can't test it)
>
>     http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2014-July/274179.html
>
> So, what should we do ? Tomasz ?
>
>>> I will wait till Monday (ie -rc4) and repost, I hope that's acceptable.
>>
>> There is a procedure to solve this branch dependency.
>>
>> 1. Create a patchset with only the changes in drivers/cpuidle (+ misc dt
>> stuff)
>>
>> 2. Send the patchset to me.
>
> Ok. I will do it straight away.
>
>> 3. I create a branch with these patches (which will be merged in my
>> cpuidle next branch)
>> 4. Merge this branch to a new branch (based on 3.17-rcX) and put on top
>> of that your changes for ARM[64]
>>
>> 5. Send the PR to Catalin and Arnd (one for each branch or one for both
>> arch)
>
> There is no ARM code in my series. So to sum it up:
>
> a) I send a pull request to Catalin for arm64 patches on top of the branch
>     you are creating with my patches
 >
> b) You take care of merging the CPUidle related patches through your
>     tree
>
> Is the above what you meant ?

Right, that allows to share a branch across the trees and resolve the 
dependencies when a patchset is touching different subsystems.

I realize the dependency is inverted regarding what I proposed 
initially, so it is up to Catalin to create the branch and I will share 
it with him.

> I will send you an mbox for CPUidle related patches straight away (well,
> as soon as I know what to do with patch 8).

You can send me the patches 6,7,8. I will create the branch with only 
the 2 first patches and re-integrate the patch 8 in the my cpuidle next 
branch if the Samsung guys give their ack later.

Thanks

   -- Daniel

-- 
  <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