On Thu, Jan 09, 2025 at 05:49:42PM +0100, Kory Maincent wrote: > On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 17:27:03 +0100 > Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Thu, Jan 09, 2025 at 05:09:57PM +0100, Kory Maincent wrote: > > > On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 07:59:26 -0800 > > > Jakub Kicinski <kuba@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > On Thu, 09 Jan 2025 11:18:05 +0100 Kory Maincent wrote: > > [...] > > > > > > > > This index is not used in the series, I see later on you'll add power > > > > evaluation strategy but that also seems to be within a domain not > > > > device? > > > > > > > > Doesn't it make sense to move patches 11-14 to the next series? > > > > The other 11 patches seem to my untrained eye to reshuffle existing > > > > stuff, so they would make sense as a cohesive series. > > I think I should only drop patch 11 and 12 from this series which add something > new while the rest is reshuffle or fix code. > > > > Indeed PSE index is used only as user information but there is nothing > > > correlated. You are right maybe we can add PSE index when we have something > > > usable for it. > > > > No user, means, it is not exposed to the user space, it is not about > > actual user space users. > > I may have understood incorrectly but still. Not sure the PSE device index is > interesting for now even in the budget evaluation strategy series. It is > related to PSE power domains therefore PSE power domain index solely should be > sufficient. Oh.. You can drop it for now. :) -- Pengutronix e.K. | | Steuerwalder Str. 21 | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
