Re: [PATCH v9 00/11] PM / Domains: Support hierarchical CPU arrangement (PSCI/ARM) (a subset)

[Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>]

On Thu, Oct 04, 2018 at 11:32:41AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 11:04 AM Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@rjwysocki.net> wrote:
> >
> > On Thursday, October 4, 2018 10:58:53 AM CEST Ulf Hansson wrote:
> > > On 4 October 2018 at 10:39, Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@kernel.org> wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Oct 3, 2018 at 4:39 PM Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> I have digested the review comments so far, including a recent offlist chat
> > > >> with with Lorenzo Pieralisi around the debatable PSCI changes. More or less I
> > > >> have a plan for how to move forward.
> > > >>
> > > >> However, to avoid re-posting non-changed patches over and over again, I decided
> > > >> to withhold the more debatable part from this v9, hence this is not the complete
> > > >> series to make things play. In v9, I have just included the trivial changes,
> > > >> which are either already acked/reviewed or hopefully can be rather soon/easily.
> > > >>
> > > >> My hope is to get this queued for v4.20, to move things forward. I know it's
> > > >> late, but there are more or less nothing new here since v8.
> > > >
> > > > I have no problems with the first three patches in this series, so I
> > > > can apply them right away.  Do you want me to do that?
> > >
> > > Yes, please.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > As for the rest, the cpuidle driver patch looks OK to me, but the
> > > > PSCI-related ones need ACKs.
> > >
> > > For some yes, but I think you can go ahead with a few more.
> > >
> > > Patch 4, 5 is already acked/reviewed.
> > >
> > > Patch 6 should be fine (if you are okay with it else wait for an ack
> > > from Daniel)
> >
> > OK, thanks.
> >
> > Do the 4-6 depend on the 1-3?
> 
> I don't see any dependency there, so I'll queue up the 1-3 in
> pm-domains and the 4-6 in pm-cpuidle.

I do not see why we should merge patches 4-6 for v4.20; they add legacy
(DT bindings and related parsing code) with no user in the kernel; we
may still want to tweak them, in particular PSCI DT bindings.

Likewise, it makes no sense to merge patches 7-8 without the rest of
the PSCI patches.

Why do not we target v4.20-rc1 for the whole series re-posting and we take
it from there given that we are at -rc6 tail end ?

Thanks,
Lorenzo