Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1726374.375PCQfjLZ@aspire.rjw.lan>
References: <20180620172226.15012-1-ulf.hansson@linaro.org>
 <2056372.NMt4aPaF4h@aspire.rjw.lan> <2205807.cU2puvubpP@aspire.rjw.lan> <1726374.375PCQfjLZ@aspire.rjw.lan>
From:   Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>
Date:   Fri, 3 Aug 2018 13:42:06 +0200
Message-ID: <CAPDyKFrmP15+_hyRp44Jw-wsTmsNFKORdCeGJEgW8o0OoKiHhA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 09/26] kernel/cpu_pm: Manage runtime PM in the idle
 path for CPUs
To:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
Cc:     Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
        Lorenzo Pieralisi <Lorenzo.Pieralisi@arm.com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
        Linux PM <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
        Kevin Hilman <khilman@kernel.org>,
        Lina Iyer <ilina@codeaurora.org>,
        Lina Iyer <lina.iyer@linaro.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@arm.com>,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        linux-arm-msm <linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

[...]

>>
>> Assuming that I have got that right, there are concerns, mostly regarding
>> patch [07/26], but I will reply to that directly.
>
> Well, I haven't got that right, so never mind.
>
> There are a few minor things to address, but apart from that the general
> genpd patches look ready.

Alright, thanks!

I will re-spin the series and post a new version once 4.19 rc1 is out.
Hopefully we can queue it up early in next cycle to get it tested in
next for a while.

>
>> The $subject patch is fine by me by itself, but it obviously depends on the
>> previous ones.  Patches [01-02/26] are fine too, but they don't seem to be
>> particularly useful without the rest of the series.
>>
>> As far as patches [10-26/26] go, I'd like to see some review comments and/or
>> tags from the people with vested interest in there, in particular from Daniel
>> on patch [12/26] and from Sudeep on the PSCI ones.
>
> But this still holds.

Actually, patch 10 and patch11 is ready to go as well. I ping Daniel
on patch 12.

In regards to the rest of the series, some of the PSCI/ARM changes
have been reviewed by Mark Rutland, however several changes have not
been acked.

On the other hand, one can also interpret the long silence in regards
to PSCI/ARM changes as they are good to go. :-)

Kind regards
Uffe