From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751332AbbCTSbM (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Mar 2015 14:31:12 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:41022 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750993AbbCTSbK (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Mar 2015 14:31:10 -0400 Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2015 18:31:11 +0000 From: Lorenzo Pieralisi To: Daniel Lezcano Cc: "rjw@rjwysocki.net" , "linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Catalin Marinas , "robherring2@gmail.com" , "arnd@arndb.de" , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "lina.iyer@linaro.org" , "sboyd@codeaurora.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 0/8] ARM: cpuidle: Unify the ARM64/ARM DT approach Message-ID: <20150320183111.GA8891@red-moon> References: <1426851841-2072-1-git-send-email-daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1426851841-2072-1-git-send-email-daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Daniel, On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 11:43:53AM +0000, Daniel Lezcano wrote: > There is a big number of cpuidle drivers for the ARM architecture. > > These drivers have been cleaned up and grouped into the drivers/cpuidle > directory to keep track of the changes more easily and ensure the code > is following the same scheme across the drivers. > > That had the benefit of simplifying the code and factor out a lot of common > parts. Beside that, as the drivers belong to the 'drivers' directory, we had > to split the arch specific bits and the generic code in order to keep > everything self contained. The platform driver paradigm was used for this > purpose. > > Unfortunately, this approach is now no longer accepted and a different solution > must be provided to reach the same goal: one example is the Qualcomm cpuidle > driver upstreaming attempt. > > In the meantime, ARM64 developed a generic cpuidle driver based on DT definition. > > The DT definition provides an 'enable-method' to specify one of the cpu > operations (PSCI, ...). > > This patchset unify this driver with ARM32, using the same DT definition. > > Thanks with this patchset we can use the 'enable-method' to specify a cpu > operations, hence get rid of the platform driver approach and go further in the > cpuidle driver flexibility via the DT. I had a look and the series seems fine, if you have a branch I can pull from I will test on arm64 and add the required tags. Thank you, Lorenzo From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com (Lorenzo Pieralisi) Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2015 18:31:11 +0000 Subject: [PATCH V3 0/8] ARM: cpuidle: Unify the ARM64/ARM DT approach In-Reply-To: <1426851841-2072-1-git-send-email-daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> References: <1426851841-2072-1-git-send-email-daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> Message-ID: <20150320183111.GA8891@red-moon> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Hi Daniel, On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 11:43:53AM +0000, Daniel Lezcano wrote: > There is a big number of cpuidle drivers for the ARM architecture. > > These drivers have been cleaned up and grouped into the drivers/cpuidle > directory to keep track of the changes more easily and ensure the code > is following the same scheme across the drivers. > > That had the benefit of simplifying the code and factor out a lot of common > parts. Beside that, as the drivers belong to the 'drivers' directory, we had > to split the arch specific bits and the generic code in order to keep > everything self contained. The platform driver paradigm was used for this > purpose. > > Unfortunately, this approach is now no longer accepted and a different solution > must be provided to reach the same goal: one example is the Qualcomm cpuidle > driver upstreaming attempt. > > In the meantime, ARM64 developed a generic cpuidle driver based on DT definition. > > The DT definition provides an 'enable-method' to specify one of the cpu > operations (PSCI, ...). > > This patchset unify this driver with ARM32, using the same DT definition. > > Thanks with this patchset we can use the 'enable-method' to specify a cpu > operations, hence get rid of the platform driver approach and go further in the > cpuidle driver flexibility via the DT. I had a look and the series seems fine, if you have a branch I can pull from I will test on arm64 and add the required tags. Thank you, Lorenzo