Re: [PATCH v3 00/19] Disable USB U1/U2 entry for QC targets

[Konrad Dybcio]

On 26.12.2024 5:55 AM, Prashanth K wrote:
> 
> 
> On 26-12-24 10:13 am, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 18, 2024 at 03:56:48PM +0530, Prashanth K wrote:
>>> Enabling U1 and U2 power-saving states can lead to stability and
>>> performance issues, particularly for latency-sensitive or high-
>>> throughput applications. These low-power link states are intended
>>> to reduce power consumption by allowing the device to enter partial
>>> low-power modes during idle periods. However, they can sometimes
>>> result in unexpected behavior. Over the years, some of the issues
>>> seen are as follows:
> 
> [...]
> 
>>> Krishna Kurapati (8):
>>>   arm64: dts: qcom: Disable USB U1/U2 entry for SM8350
>>>   arm64: dts: qcom: Disable USB U1/U2 entry for SM8450
>>>   arm64: dts: qcom: Disable USB U1/U2 entry for SM8150
>>>   arm64: dts: qcom: Disable USB U1/U2 entry for SM6125
>>>   arm64: dts: qcom: Disable USB U1/U2 entry for SM8250
>>>   arm64: dts: qcom: Disable USB U1/U2 entry for SM6350
>>>   arm64: dts: qcom: Disable USB U1/U2 entry for SC7280
>>>   arm64: dts: qcom: Disable USB U1/U2 entry for SA8775P
>>
>> Thank you for submitting this, changes looks good and this is very
>> welcome corrections!
>>
>> But patch subject is not okay. The prefix should match other changes in
>> these files, and no "for XYZ" suffix.
>>
>> As such, these should all look like:
>>
>> "arm64: dts: qcom: <soc>: Disable USB U1/U2 entry"
>>
>>>
>>> Prashanth K (11):
>>>   arm64: dts: qcom: Disable USB U1/U2 entry for SDM630
>>>   arm64: dts: qcom: Disable USB U1/U2 entry for SDM845
>>>   arm64: dts: qcom: Disable USB U1/U2 entry for SDX75
>>>   ARM: dts: qcom: Disable USB U1/U2 entry for SDX65
>>>   ARM: dts: qcom: Disable USB U1/U2 entry for SDX55
>>
>> I merge Arm and Arm64 patches through different trees, so I would
>> appreciate if you send these two as a separate series (also v4).
>>
> 
> Sure, will update the subject for all patches, and split it into 2
> series (v4 for for both arm and arm64). I hope its fine to keep the
> Reviewed-by tag from Konrad on next version.

Yes, you can usually feel free to keep tags, unless there's major
changes

Konrad