On Tue, 25 May 2021 at 07:39, Anup Patel <anup@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 11:31 PM Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Mon, 17 May 2021 at 15:10, Anup Patel <anup.patel@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > The generic power domain related code in PSCI domain driver is largely > > > independent of PSCI and can be shared with RISC-V SBI domain driver > > > hence we factor-out this code into dt_idle_genpd.c and dt_idle_genpd.h. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Anup Patel <anup.patel@xxxxxxx> > > > > This is clearly a big step in the right direction. Just a couple minor > > things, see more below. > > > > Note that, I have a couple of patches in the pipe for the > > cpuidle-psci-domain driver (not ready to be posted). I need a couple > > of more days to confirm this restructuring still makes sense beyond > > these potential new changes. I will let you know as soon as I can with > > the outcome. > > Sure, I will wait for more comments from you. I was thinking of sending > next revision of patches sometime next week with the renaming of > function names which you suggested. Sounds good, that allows me a few more days this week. > > > > > [...] > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/cpuidle/dt_idle_genpd.c b/drivers/cpuidle/dt_idle_genpd.c > > > > I think it would be a good idea to add a new section for this to the > > MAINTAINERS file. Perhaps a "DT IDLE DOMAIN" section? Or perhaps you > > have another idea? > > > > In any case, I am happy to continue with maintenance of this code, > > even in the new restructured form. > > Yes, a separate "DT IDLE DOMAIN" section in MAINTAINERS file > sounds good to me. > > Anyway the dt_idle_genpd is factored-out code from cpuidle-psci-domain.c > so I suggest you to maintain dt_idle_genpd as well. > > Do you want me to add a "DT IDLE DOMAIN" section in the > MAINTAINERS file as part of this patch ?? Yeah, that works for me. Perhaps extend it to .. PM DOMAIN though. [...] Kind regards Uffe
