From: Luiz Capitulino <luizcap@redhat.com>
To: "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,
Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] platform/mellanox: mlxbf-pmc: Fix module loading
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2024 12:07:53 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <eaef16d8-d43a-49c8-b1a0-450ab4c1ba9f@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8a05120e-fcdf-f7f2-6b60-22e3ee819d37@linux.intel.com>
On 2024-02-26 11:59, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Feb 2024, 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).
>>
>> 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/
>>
>> Maybe those two should be included for 6.8 as well?
>
> Those look a new feature to me so they belong to for-next. So no, they
> will not end up into 6.8 (to fixes branch). If the 2 patches in this
> series do not apply without some for-next targetting dependencies, you
> should rebase on top of fixes branch and send a new version.
Understood.
> About those two patches, please also see my reply. I intentionally only 2
> patches of that series because I wanted to see sysfs documentation first
> so you should resend those two patches to for-next with sysfs
> documentation.
I'm actually not author of the other patches :)
- Luiz
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-02-26 17:07 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
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 [this message]
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=eaef16d8-d43a-49c8-b1a0-450ab4c1ba9f@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®