On Tue, Dec 14, 2021 at 07:02:57PM +0000, Robin Murphy wrote: > On 2021-12-14 18:33, Will Deacon wrote: > > On Tue, 14 Dec 2021 14:16:12 +0000, Robin Murphy wrote: > > > Here's v2, with the DSU binding actually finished (oh the shame...) and > > > the NVIDIA PMU patch pulled in to benefit from the cleanup and keep > > > things manageably together. The initial binding patch from v1 is no > > > longer included since Rob has picked it up separately. > > > > > > Refactoring arm_pmu's probing to be more modular turns out to be a > > > substantial yak to shave, so in the end I decided it *is* worth > > > implementing Mark's macro suggestion now - after all, it can simply be > > > converted from a function template to a structure template as and when > > > the time comes. > > > > > > [...] > > > > Applied first three to will (for-next/perf-cpu), thanks! > > > > [1/5] arm64: perf: Support Denver and Carmel PMUs > > https://git.kernel.org/will/c/d4c4844a9b47 > > [2/5] arm64: perf: Simplify registration boilerplate > > https://git.kernel.org/will/c/6ac9f30bd43b > > [3/5] arm64: perf: Support new DT compatibles > > https://git.kernel.org/will/c/893c34b60a59 > > Thanks Will! Just to clarify, are you leaving the DSU binding patches for > Rob to pick up, or waiting for the typo to get fixed? (and if the former - > Rob, would you like me to resend a v3 with the typo fixed?) I'm about to disappear on holiday, so I figured it was best to take the first three patches and leave the other two (as they seem less urgent and also had comment from Suzuki). If somebody else grabs 'em when they're ready, so be it, otherwise I'll pick them next time around. Cheers, Will
