From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751449AbbCTSk2 (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Mar 2015 14:40:28 -0400 Received: from mail-wi0-f176.google.com ([209.85.212.176]:34988 "EHLO mail-wi0-f176.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750929AbbCTSj1 (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Mar 2015 14:39:27 -0400 Message-ID: <550C695B.7080200@linaro.org> Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2015 19:39:23 +0100 From: Daniel Lezcano User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Lorenzo Pieralisi 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 References: <1426851841-2072-1-git-send-email-daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> <20150320183111.GA8891@red-moon> In-Reply-To: <20150320183111.GA8891@red-moon> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 03/20/2015 07:31 PM, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote: > 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. Yes, sure. http://git.linaro.org/git-ro/people/daniel.lezcano/linux.git cpuidle/4.1 Thanks ! -- Daniel -- Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: daniel.lezcano@linaro.org (Daniel Lezcano) Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2015 19:39:23 +0100 Subject: [PATCH V3 0/8] ARM: cpuidle: Unify the ARM64/ARM DT approach In-Reply-To: <20150320183111.GA8891@red-moon> References: <1426851841-2072-1-git-send-email-daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> <20150320183111.GA8891@red-moon> Message-ID: <550C695B.7080200@linaro.org> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 03/20/2015 07:31 PM, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote: > 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. Yes, sure. http://git.linaro.org/git-ro/people/daniel.lezcano/linux.git cpuidle/4.1 Thanks ! -- Daniel -- Linaro.org ? Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog