On Thu, 22 Aug 2024 at 20:05, Stanimir Varbanov <stanimir.k.varbanov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi Ulf, > > On 21.08.24 г. 11:56 ч., Ulf Hansson wrote: > > On Tue, 20 Aug 2024 at 22:48, Stanimir Varbanov > > <stanimir.k.varbanov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> Hi Ulf, > >> > >> Thank you for the patch! > >> > >> On 23.07.24 г. 17:46 ч., Ulf Hansson wrote: > >>> Rather than hooking up the PM domains through devm_pm_opp_attach_genpd() > >>> and manage the device-link, let's avoid the boilerplate-code by converting > >>> into dev_pm_domain_attach|detach_list. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@xxxxxxxxxx> > >>> --- > >>> drivers/media/platform/qcom/venus/core.c | 8 ++--- > >>> drivers/media/platform/qcom/venus/core.h | 6 +--- > >>> .../media/platform/qcom/venus/pm_helpers.c | 31 ++++++------------- > >>> 3 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-) > >>> > >> > >> Acked-by: Stanimir Varbanov <stanimir.k.varbanov@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > Thanks! > > > >> > >> I'll pick it through linux-media. > > > > Please don't. > > > > I should have stated that this depends on another series [1] - and > > they need either to go together or we need to defer $subject patch > > until the next release cycle. > > Sure, then I guess we will deffer venus patch until the preparation > series is merged to avoid conflicts. Thank you! Assuming the preparation series gets accepted, maybe we can give it a try via my pmdomain tree? Or do expect to land a lot of code that could conflict? I also realized that I already have a different series [1] queued in my pmdomain tree from Dikshita Agarwal (reviewed by Bryan), that moves an existing call for dev_pm_domain_attach() to the new devm_pm_domain_attach() helper. So far I haven't received any reports about conflicts from linux-next, so it looks good I think. Kind regards Uffe [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/CAPDyKFqsHL3uatmLZaRzZ_GfkZw-+fURQNSEgvmrf-ini+WHng@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
