[PATCH v3 0/8] PM / Domains: DT support for domain idle states & atomic PM domains
Rafael J. Wysocki
rafael at kernel.org
Thu Oct 20 15:48:20 PDT 2016
On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 12:44 AM, Lina Iyer <lina.iyer at linaro.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 17 2016 at 01:30 -0600, Ulf Hansson wrote:
>>
>> On 14 October 2016 at 19:47, Lina Iyer <lina.iyer at linaro.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> Changes since v2 [3] -
>>> - Addressed review comments from v2.
>>> - domain-idle-states documentation updated
>>> - fixed compiler issues with imx driver
>>> - minor code change in pm_domains.c
>>> - The series is available at [4].
>>>
>>> Changes since v1 [2] -
>>> - Addressed review comments from v1.
>>> - Fixes around dynamic allocation of genpd states
>>> - Used OF method for iterating phandles
>>> - Updated documentation, examples
>>> - Rename state variable (provider -> fwnode)
>>> - The series is available at [3].
>>>
>>> The changes from [1] are -
>>> - Allocating memory for domain idle states dynamically
>>> - Conform to naming conventions for internal and exported genpd functions
>>> - DT binding example for domain-idle-state
>>> - Use fwnode instead of of_node
>>> - Handle atomic case for removal of PM Domain
>>> - Rebase on top of Rafael's pm/genpd tree
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Lina
>>>
>>> Lina Iyer (8):
>>> PM / Domains: Make genpd state allocation dynamic
>>> PM / Domain: Add residency property to genpd states
>>> PM / Domains: Allow domain power states to be read from DT
>>> PM / Domains: Save the fwnode in genpd_power_state
>>> dt/bindings: Update binding for PM domain idle states
>>> PM / Domains: Abstract genpd locking
>>> PM / Domains: Support IRQ safe PM domains
>>> PM / doc: Update device documentation for devices in IRQ safe PM
>>> domains
>>>
>>> .../devicetree/bindings/power/power_domain.txt | 43 +++
>>> Documentation/power/devices.txt | 9 +-
>>> arch/arm/mach-imx/gpc.c | 17 +-
>>> drivers/base/power/domain.c | 358
>>> +++++++++++++++++----
>>> include/linux/pm_domain.h | 28 +-
>>> 5 files changed, 383 insertions(+), 72 deletions(-)
>>>
>>
>> Rafael, Lina,
>>
>> This looks good to me! Unless any other objections, I suggest to apply
>> this to get it tested in linux-next.
>>
>> Kind regards
>> Uffe
>>
> Rafael,
>
> If there are no objections, could you pick this patch for linux-next?
It is in my queue, but not at the top yet.
Thanks,
Rafael
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list