On 4 August 2015 at 11:18, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On 04/08/15 15:58, Ashwin Chaugule wrote: >> >> On 4 August 2015 at 10:51, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@xxxxxxx> wrote: >>> >>> On 03/08/15 18:40, Ashwin Chaugule wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> On 20 July 2015 at 10:21, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@xxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On 09/07/15 19:04, Ashwin Chaugule wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> In general, you need to split this series so that initially few patches >>>>> deal with all the existing Kconfig fix-ups and then introduce >>>>> PCC/PSS/CPPC related stuffs. That would help me rebase and test _LPI >>>>> support. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Hm. I tried to maintain bisectability and make it easier for you to >>>> rebase LPI patchwork too. Let me see if I can revisit now that I'm >>>> back from vacation. :) >>>> >>> >>> How about you just drop any idle related changes so that I will handle >>> that to keep it simple. >> >> >> Unfortunately I can't skip idle changes completely since it is tightly >> coupled with the acpi_processor driver as well. >> > > True, but only for ARM64 where we haven't enabled ACPI_PROCESSOR yet in > mainline. So from that perspective, it should not cause any issue for > keeping changes bisectable on x86/ia64. You can keep these idle changes > locally for your testing. Trying to get everything at once will > definitely be problematic IMO. Bisectability aside, without the idle changes to decouple it from ACPI_PROCESSOR, the CPPC code will be non-functional. CPPC code has been around for review publicly for almost a year and we need it to be mainlined soon. So, given that we've converged on a solution for new Kconfigs for Idle and PSS and that they're separate patches, why not let it progress forwards as part of this series? Thanks, Ashwin. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
