Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Tue, 23 Mar 2021 17:56:39 -0700
From:   Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@chromium.org>
To:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Sandeep Maheswaram <sanm@codeaurora.org>,
        Andy Gross <agross@kernel.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        Felipe Balbi <balbi@kernel.org>,
        Stephen Boyd <swboyd@chromium.org>,
        Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>,
        linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-usb@vger.kernel.org,
        devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Manu Gautam <mgautam@codeaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/4] usb: dwc3: qcom: Configure wakeup interrupts and
 set genpd active wakeup flag
Message-ID: <YFqORzIw5WOLyDwm@google.com>
References: <1616434280-32635-1-git-send-email-sanm@codeaurora.org>
 <1616434280-32635-4-git-send-email-sanm@codeaurora.org>
 <YFna5mxrJAzR2s0g@kroah.com>
 <YFqMivRlDllNuqu/@google.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <YFqMivRlDllNuqu/@google.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 05:49:14PM -0700, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 01:11:18PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 11:01:19PM +0530, Sandeep Maheswaram wrote:
> > > Configure interrupts based on hs_phy_mode to avoid triggering of
> > > interrupts during system suspend and suspends successfully.
> > > Set genpd active wakeup flag for usb gdsc if wakeup capable devices
> > > are connected so that wake up happens without reenumeration.
> > > Add helper functions to enable,disable wake irqs.
> > 
> > That feels like a lot of different things all in one patch.
> 
> Sandeep: one thing you could do to reduce the churn is to add
> dwc3_qcom_enable/disable_wakeup_irq() in a separate patch, without
> any functional changes. Then this patch would only add the different
> branches based on the PHY mode.
> 
> The handling of the power domain could probably also be done in a
> separate patch, if I recall correctly it is only an optimization.

Actually another thing that could be in a separate patch is enabling
wakeup support based on 'wakeup-source'. That's not even directly
related with this series.

With all that you'd have fairly atomic patches and it should be easy to
write meaningful commit messages.