Hi, On 19. 9. 25. 오후 3:37, Artur Świgoń wrote: > On Wed, 2019-09-25 at 15:12 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On 19. 9. 25. 오후 2:47, Artur Świgoń wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> On Fri, 2019-09-20 at 11:14 +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote: >>>> Hi Artur, >>>> >>>> I tried to just build this patch on mainline kernel or linux-next. >>>> But, when I applied them, merge conflict happens. You didn't develop >>>> them on latest version. Please rebase them based on latest mainline kernel. >>> >>> I developed on top of next-20190918 on which I applied >>> https://patchwork.kernel.org/cover/11149497/ as I mentioned in the cover >>> letter. The dev_pm_qos patches and my RFC have just cleanly rebased together on >>> top of next-20190920. Could you check if you have the dev_pm_qos patches (v5, >>> the version number is missing in this one; link above) and if so, where does the >>> conflict appear? >> >> I faced on the merge conflict of drivers/devfreq/exynos-bus.c. >> I think that It is not related to to dev_pm_qos patch. > > I think that it is actually related to the specific version of dev_pm_qos (v5) that > I used because patch 08/08 of dev_pm_qos series modifies exynos_bus_probe() in > drivers/devfreq/exynos-bus.c (https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11149507/). > > I will rebase the next RFC (v3) on latest dev_pm_qos patches from Leonard and the > latest Linux-next kernel. My mistake. I only checked the Leonard's latest patches(v8) which doesn't contain this patch. OK. I'll try again. Thanks. [1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11149507/ - PM / devfreq: Move opp notifier registration to core > >> Maybe, Kamil's patches[1] changed the many things of exynos-bus.c >> If your test branch doesn't contain following patches, >> you need to rebase your patches based on latest mainline kernel >> from Linus Torvald. >> [1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/cover/11083663/ >> - [RESEND PATCH v5 0/4] add coupled regulators for Exynos5422/5800 > > Yes, requiring Kamil's patches is one of the changes in this RFC (v2), since they > are already merged. > >> Today, I tried to apply these patch again based on latest mainline kernel. >> The merge conflict happen still. >> >> - merge conflict log >> Applying: devfreq: exynos-bus: Extract exynos_bus_profile_init() >> error: patch failed: drivers/devfreq/exynos-bus.c:334 >> error: drivers/devfreq/exynos-bus.c: patch does not apply >> Patch failed at 0001 devfreq: exynos-bus: Extract exynos_bus_profile_init() >> >> >>> >>>> On 19. 9. 20. 오전 10:07, Chanwoo Choi wrote: >>>>> Hi Artur, >>>>> >>>>> On v1, I mentioned that we need to discuss how to change >>>>> the v2 for this. But, I have not received any reply from you on v1. >>>>> And, without your reply from v1, you just send v2. >>>>> >>>>> I think that it is not proper development sequence. >>>>> I have spent many times to review your patches >>>>> and also I'll review your patches. You have to take care >>>>> the reply of reviewer and and keep the basic rule >>>>> of mailing contribution for discussion. >>>>> >>>>> On 19. 9. 19. 오후 11:22, Artur Świgoń wrote: >>>>>> The following patchset adds interconnect[1][2] framework support to the >>>>>> exynos-bus devfreq driver. Extending the devfreq driver with interconnect >>>>>> capabilities started as a response to the issue referenced in [3]. The >>>>>> patches can be subdivided into four logical groups: >>>>>> >>>>>> (a) Refactoring the existing devfreq driver in order to improve readability >>>>>> and accommodate for adding new code (patches 01--04/11). >>>>>> >>>>>> (b) Tweaking the interconnect framework to support the exynos-bus use case >>>>>> (patches 05--07/11). Exporting of_icc_get_from_provider() allows us to >>>>>> avoid hardcoding every single graph edge in the DT or driver source, and >>>>>> relaxing the requirement contained in that function removes the need to >>>>>> provide dummy node IDs in the DT. Adjusting the logic in >>>>>> apply_constraints() (drivers/interconnect/core.c) accounts for the fact >>>>>> that every bus is a separate entity and therefore a separate interconnect >>>>>> provider, albeit constituting a part of a larger hierarchy. >>>>>> >>>>>> (c) Implementing interconnect providers in the exynos-bus devfreq driver >>>>>> and adding required DT properties for one selected platform, namely >>>>>> Exynos4412 (patches 08--09/11). Due to the fact that this aims to be a >>>>>> generic driver for various Exynos SoCs, node IDs are generated dynamically >>>>>> rather than hardcoded. This has been determined to be a simpler approach, >>>>>> but depends on changes described in (b). >>>>>> >>>>>> (d) Implementing a sample interconnect consumer for exynos-mixer targeted >>>>>> at the issue referenced in [3], again with DT info only for Exynos4412 >>>>>> (patches 10--11/11). >>>>>> >>>>>> Integration of devfreq and interconnect functionalities is achieved by >>>>>> using dev_pm_qos_*() API[5]. All new code works equally well when >>>>>> CONFIG_INTERCONNECT is 'n' (as in exynos_defconfig) in which case all >>>>>> interconnect API functions are no-ops. >>>>>> >>>>>> This patchset depends on [5]. >>>>>> >>>>>> --- Changes since v1 [6]: >>>>>> * Rebase on [4] (coupled regulators). >>>>>> * Rebase on [5] (dev_pm_qos for devfreq). >>>>>> * Use dev_pm_qos_*() API[5] instead of overriding frequency in >>>>>> exynos_bus_target(). >>>>>> * Use IDR for node ID allocation. >>>>>> * Avoid goto in functions extracted in patches 01 & 02 (cf. patch 04). >>>>>> * Reverse order of multiplication and division in >>>>>> mixer_set_memory_bandwidth() (patch 11) to avoid integer overflow. >>>>>> >>>>>> --- >>>>>> Artur Świgoń >>>>>> Samsung R&D Institute Poland >>>>>> Samsung Electronics >>>>>> >>>>>> --- >>>>>> References: >>>>>> [1] Documentation/interconnect/interconnect.rst >>>>>> [2] Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interconnect/interconnect.txt >>>>>> [3] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10861757/ (original issue) >>>>>> [4] https://patchwork.kernel.org/cover/11083663/ (coupled regulators; merged) >>>>>> [5] https://patchwork.kernel.org/cover/11149497/ (dev_pm_qos for devfreq) >>>>>> [6] https://patchwork.kernel.org/cover/11054417/ (v1 of this RFC) >>>>>> >>>>>> Artur Świgoń (10): >>>>>> devfreq: exynos-bus: Extract exynos_bus_profile_init() >>>>>> devfreq: exynos-bus: Extract exynos_bus_profile_init_passive() >>>>>> devfreq: exynos-bus: Change goto-based logic to if-else logic >>>>>> devfreq: exynos-bus: Clean up code >>>>>> interconnect: Export of_icc_get_from_provider() >>>>>> interconnect: Relax requirement in of_icc_get_from_provider() >>>>>> interconnect: Relax condition in apply_constraints() >>>>>> arm: dts: exynos: Add parents and #interconnect-cells to Exynos4412 >>>>>> devfreq: exynos-bus: Add interconnect functionality to exynos-bus >>>>>> arm: dts: exynos: Add interconnects to Exynos4412 mixer >>>>>> >>>>>> Marek Szyprowski (1): >>>>>> drm: exynos: mixer: Add interconnect support >>>>>> >>>>>> .../boot/dts/exynos4412-odroid-common.dtsi | 1 + >>>>>> arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4412.dtsi | 10 + >>>>>> drivers/devfreq/exynos-bus.c | 319 +++++++++++++----- >>>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_mixer.c | 71 +++- >>>>>> drivers/interconnect/core.c | 12 +- >>>>>> include/linux/interconnect-provider.h | 6 + >>>>>> 6 files changed, 327 insertions(+), 92 deletions(-) >>>>>> > > > > -- Best Regards, Chanwoo Choi Samsung Electronics
