Re: [PATCH v9 00/11] PM / Domains: Support hierarchical CPU arrangement (PSCI/ARM) (a subset)

[Ulf Hansson]

On 4 October 2018 at 11:32, Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 11:04 AM Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> On Thursday, October 4, 2018 10:58:53 AM CEST Ulf Hansson wrote:
>> > On 4 October 2018 at 10:39, Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > > On Wed, Oct 3, 2018 at 4:39 PM Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >> I have digested the review comments so far, including a recent offlist chat
>> > >> with with Lorenzo Pieralisi around the debatable PSCI changes. More or less I
>> > >> have a plan for how to move forward.
>> > >>
>> > >> However, to avoid re-posting non-changed patches over and over again, I decided
>> > >> to withhold the more debatable part from this v9, hence this is not the complete
>> > >> series to make things play. In v9, I have just included the trivial changes,
>> > >> which are either already acked/reviewed or hopefully can be rather soon/easily.
>> > >>
>> > >> My hope is to get this queued for v4.20, to move things forward. I know it's
>> > >> late, but there are more or less nothing new here since v8.
>> > >
>> > > I have no problems with the first three patches in this series, so I
>> > > can apply them right away.  Do you want me to do that?
>> >
>> > Yes, please.
>> >
>> > >
>> > > As for the rest, the cpuidle driver patch looks OK to me, but the
>> > > PSCI-related ones need ACKs.
>> >
>> > For some yes, but I think you can go ahead with a few more.
>> >
>> > Patch 4, 5 is already acked/reviewed.
>> >
>> > Patch 6 should be fine (if you are okay with it else wait for an ack
>> > from Daniel)
>>
>> OK, thanks.
>>
>> Do the 4-6 depend on the 1-3?
>
> I don't see any dependency there, so I'll queue up the 1-3 in
> pm-domains and the 4-6 in pm-cpuidle.

Great, thanks!

Make sure you put the remaining of the PSCI changes on pm-cpuidle
(once acked), as there are dependency.

Kind regards
Uffe