mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Luiz Capitulino <luizcap@redhat.com>
To: "Hans de Goede" <hdegoede@redhat.com>,
	"Ilpo Järvinen" <ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: shravankr@nvidia.com, davthompson@nvidia.com, ndalvi@redhat.com,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] platform/mellanox: mlxbf-pmc: Fix module loading
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2024 12:05:57 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <6c25bbf6-db97-4d55-b7d6-b7b6dbb60a82@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <eea32e56-2ea3-4a11-b1b9-8dd46dac7d72@redhat.com>

On 2024-02-26 11:57, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Hi Luiz,
> 
> On 2/26/24 17:10, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
>> On 2024-02-26 11:04, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
>>> On Mon, 26 Feb 2024, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2024-02-26 08:27, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, 22 Feb 2024 15:57:28 -0500, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> The mlxbf-pmc driver fails to load when the firmware reports a new but not
>>>>>> yet implemented performance block. I can reproduce this today with a
>>>>>> Bluefield-3 card and UEFI version 4.6.0-18-g7d063bb-BId13035, since this
>>>>>> reports the new clock_measure performance block.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This[1] patch from Shravan implements the clock_measure support and will
>>>>>> solve the issue. But this series avoids the situation by ignoring and
>>>>>> logging unsupported performance blocks.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thank you for your contribution, it has been applied to my local
>>>>> review-ilpo branch. Note it will show up in the public
>>>>> platform-drivers-x86/review-ilpo branch only once I've pushed my
>>>>> local branch there, which might take a while.
>>>>
>>>> Thank you Ilpo and thanks Hans for the review.
>>>>
>>>> The only detail is that we probably want this merged for 6.8 since
>>>> the driver doesn't currently load with the configuration mentioned above.
>>>
>>> Oh, sorry, I missed the mention in the coverletter.
>>>
>>> So you'd want I drop these from review-ilpo branch as there they end
>>> up into for-next branch, and they should go through Hans instead who
>>> handles fixes branch for this cycle?
>>
>> If that's the path to get this series merged for this cycle then yes,
>> but let's see if Hans agrees (sorry that I didn't know this before
>> posting).
> 
> Hmm, new hw enablement typically goes through -next and not to
> the current fixes branch. And AFAICT this is new hw enablement,
> not a regression / bug-fix.
> 
> Is there any special reason why this needs to be in 6.8 ?

Since the new firmware feature is causing the driver not to load,
I'm seeing this more as a bug than new enablement. But it's fine
with me if you decide on not having them on 6.8.

> For RHEL kernels you can cherry-pick patches from -next
> as necessary.

I know :)

>> One additional detail is that this series is on top of linux-next, which
>> has two additional mlxbf-pmc changes:
>>
>> * https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/39be055af3506ce6f843d11e45d71620f2a96e26.1707808180.git.shravankr@nvidia.com/
>> * https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/d8548c70339a29258a906b2b518e5c48f669795c.1707808180.git.shravankr@nvidia.com/
> 
> Hmm, those are not small patches, any other reason
> why this really should go to -next IMHO.

OK.

- Luiz


  reply	other threads:[~2024-02-26 17:06 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-02-22 20:57 Luiz Capitulino
2024-02-22 20:57 ` [PATCH 1/2] platform/mellanox: mlxbf-pmc: mlxbf_pmc_event_list(): make size ptr optional Luiz Capitulino
2024-02-26 10:49   ` Hans de Goede
2024-02-22 20:57 ` [PATCH 2/2] platform/mellanox: mlxbf-pmc: Ignore unsupported performance blocks Luiz Capitulino
2024-02-26 10:49   ` Hans de Goede
2024-02-26 13:27 ` [PATCH 0/2] platform/mellanox: mlxbf-pmc: Fix module loading Ilpo Järvinen
2024-02-26 15:49   ` Luiz Capitulino
2024-02-26 16:04     ` Ilpo Järvinen
2024-02-26 16:10       ` Luiz Capitulino
2024-02-26 16:57         ` Hans de Goede
2024-02-26 17:05           ` Luiz Capitulino [this message]
2024-02-27 13:18           ` Ilpo Järvinen
2024-02-27 18:28             ` Luiz Capitulino
2024-02-26 16:59         ` Ilpo Järvinen
2024-02-26 17:07           ` Luiz Capitulino
2024-02-27 13:20             ` Ilpo Järvinen

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=6c25bbf6-db97-4d55-b7d6-b7b6dbb60a82@redhat.com \
    --to=luizcap@redhat.com \
    --cc=davthompson@nvidia.com \
    --cc=hdegoede@redhat.com \
    --cc=ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=ndalvi@redhat.com \
    --cc=platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=shravankr@nvidia.com \
    /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®