From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>
To: Ben Guthro <benjamin.guthro@citrix.com>,
Bob Moore <robert.moore@intel.com>
Cc: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>,
Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org,
xen-devel@lists.xen.org, Shane Wang <shane.wang@intel.com>,
tboot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
Richard L Maliszewski <richard.l.maliszewski@intel.com>,
Gang Wei <gang.wei@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v6 0/5] Xen/ACPI: support sleep state entering on hardware reduced systems
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 14:57:26 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3107214.itlfxJnXsN@vostro.rjw.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAOvdn6Wv1mXD-RDCZ750YQFEFf7GR0QxVARACEg0jNrUEEkBYA@mail.gmail.com>
On Monday, July 22, 2013 08:44:08 AM Ben Guthro wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 9:08 AM, Ben Guthro <Benjamin.Guthro@citrix.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 07/08/2013 09:10 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >> On Sunday, July 07, 2013 08:13:15 PM Ben Guthro wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 7:48 AM, Ben Guthro <benjamin.guthro@citrix.com> wrote:
> >>>> In version 3.4 acpi_os_prepare_sleep() got introduced in parallel with
> >>>> reduced hardware sleep support, and the two changes didn't get
> >>>> synchronized: The new code doesn't call the hook function (if so
> >>>> requested). Fix this, requiring a boolean parameter to be added to the
> >>>> hook function to distinguish "extended" from "legacy" sleep.
> >>>>
> >>>> This requires adjusting TXT, but the adjustments only go as far as
> >>>> failing the extended mode call (since, looking at the TXT interface,
> >>>> there doesn't even appear to be precautions to deal with that
> >>>> alternative interface).
> >>>>
> >>>> The hypervisor change underlying this is commit 62d1a69 ("ACPI: support
> >>>> v5 (reduced HW) sleep interface") on the master branch of
> >>>> git://xenbits.xen.org/xen.git.
> >>>>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Ben Guthro <benjamin.guthro@citrix.com>
> >>>> Cc: Richard L Maliszewski <richard.l.maliszewski@intel.com>
> >>>> Cc: Gang Wei <gang.wei@intel.com>
> >>>> Cc: Shane Wang <shane.wang@intel.com>
> >>>> Cc: Bob Moore <robert.moore@intel.com>
> >>>> Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
> >>>> Cc: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org
> >>>> Cc: tboot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> >>>>
> >>>> v2: Extend description to include reference to hypervisor side change
> >>>> v3: Split into multiple patches, separating subsystems
> >>>> Remove bool parameters, in favor of u8
> >>>> v4: Remove linux/acpi.h dependencies
> >>>> Further patch split to break out acpica from OSL
> >>>> More bool vs u8 fixes
> >>>> v5: Fix build of consumers of acpi_os_prepare_sleep() interface change,
> >>>> so intermediate builds of partial patch series will not fail.
> >>>> v6: Rebased to linux-pm linux-next branch
> >>>> Added warning in tboot early return code
> >>>> Added Reviewed-by lines
> >>>>
> >>>> Ben Guthro (5):
> >>>> acpi: Remove need to include linux/acpi.h in common acpica code
> >>>> acpi: Call acpi_os_prepare_sleep hook in reduced hardware sleep path
> >>>> acpi/xen/tboot: Adjust linux acpi OS functions to new extended
> >>>> parameter
> >>>> x86/tboot: Fail extended mode reduced hardware sleep
> >>>> xen/acpi: notify xen when reduced hardware sleep is available
> >>>
> >>> Rafael, Bob -
> >>>
> >>> Is this version of the series something that you may consider taking?
> >>> If not - is there something specific you would like to see addressed?
> >>
> >> Well, I'm afraid you need to give us some more time to process that,
> >> sorry.
> >
> > My apologies - I know it is a busy time during the merge window. I did
> > not mean to seem impatient.
> >
> > With the volume of things on the mailing list, I merely wanted to try to
> > avoid the series getting buried. If a week is too frequent to re-bump a
> > series, do you have a set of recommendations of how to best interact
> > with your workflow?
>
> Rafael (et al.)
>
> I never heard back on this point of how you prefer your workflow to
> proceed - that is, if I haven't heard anything in a couple weeks -
> should I try to re-bump the thread?
I don't think you need to. I'm waiting for Bob's comments at this point.
Bob, do you have any objections agains the Ben's patches?
Rafael
> Since this was sent around the time of the merge window, I realize
> there were other things to occupy people's time.
> Now that rc2 is out - I'm hoping that the dust has settled a bit, such
> that there may be a cycle, or two to review this series.
>
> Thanks for your time
>
> Ben
>
> >
> > I'm just trying to balance people's time to review such things, with the
> > volume of the list.
> >
> > Thanks for your time.
> >
> > Ben
> > --
> > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
--
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-07-22 12:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-07-01 11:48 Ben Guthro
2013-07-01 11:48 ` [PATCH v6 1/5] acpi: Remove need to include linux/acpi.h in common acpica code Ben Guthro
2013-07-01 11:48 ` [PATCH v6 2/5] acpi: Call acpi_os_prepare_sleep hook in reduced hardware sleep path Ben Guthro
2013-07-01 11:48 ` [PATCH v6 3/5] acpi/xen/tboot: Adjust linux acpi OS functions to new extended parameter Ben Guthro
2013-07-01 11:48 ` [PATCH v6 4/5] x86/tboot: Fail extended mode reduced hardware sleep Ben Guthro
2013-07-01 11:48 ` [PATCH v6 5/5] xen/acpi: notify xen when reduced hardware sleep is available Ben Guthro
2013-07-08 0:13 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH v6 0/5] Xen/ACPI: support sleep state entering on hardware reduced systems Ben Guthro
2013-07-08 13:10 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-07-08 13:08 ` Ben Guthro
2013-07-22 12:44 ` Ben Guthro
2013-07-22 12:57 ` Rafael J. Wysocki [this message]
2013-07-27 14:08 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3107214.itlfxJnXsN@vostro.rjw.lan \
--to=rjw@sisk.pl \
--cc=benjamin.guthro@citrix.com \
--cc=gang.wei@intel.com \
--cc=jbeulich@suse.com \
--cc=konrad.wilk@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=richard.l.maliszewski@intel.com \
--cc=robert.moore@intel.com \
--cc=shane.wang@intel.com \
--cc=tboot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xen.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®