On Sunday, August 14, 2011, Jean Pihet wrote: > Rafael, > > On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 11:56 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On Friday, August 12, 2011, Jean Pihet wrote: > >> Hi Rafael, > >> > >> 2011/8/12 Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx>: > >> > On Thursday, August 11, 2011, jean.pihet@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > >> >> From: Jean Pihet <j-pihet@xxxxxx> > >> >> > >> >> This patch set is in an RFC state, for review and comments. > >> >> > >> ... > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Questions: > >> >> 1. the user space API is still under discussions on linux-omap and linux-pm MLs, > >> >> cf. [1]. The idea is to add a user-space API for the devices constratins > >> >> PM QoS, using a sysfs entry per device > >> >> > >> >> [1] http://marc.info/?l=linux-omap&m=131232344503327&w=2 > >> >> > >> >> ToDo: > >> >> 1. write Documentation for the new PM QoS class, once the RFC is agreed on > >> >> 2. validate the constraints framework on OMAP4 HW (done on OMAP3) > >> >> 3. Need testing on platforms other than OMAP > >> >> 4. refine the power domains wake-up latency and the cpuidle figures > >> >> 5. re-visit the OMAP power domains states initialization procedure. Currently > >> >> the power states that have been changed from the constraints API which were > >> >> applied before the initialization of the power domains are lost > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Based on the master branch of the linux-omap git tree (3.0.0-rc7). Compile > >> >> tested using OMAP and x86 generic defconfigs. > >> >> > >> >> Lightly tested on OMAP3 Beagleboard (ES2.x). > >> >> Need testing on platforms other than OMAP, because of the impact on the > >> >> device insertion/removal in device_pm_add/remove > >> > > >> > The patchset looks really good to me, I don't think I have any major > >> > complaints about this version. > >> Ok good to hear it! I tried to address all comments and concerns in > >> this release. > >> > >> > > >> > The only thing I'd like to ask at the moment is whether or not the > >> > compilation of drivers/base/power/qos.c should depend on > >> > CONFIG_PM_RUNTIME. Do you think it will be used by system suspend code on any > >> > platforms? > >> I would say it should only depend on CONFIG_PM because the dev PM QoS > >> API can be used from any kernel code, being runtime PM code or not. > >> I leave the decision to the PM framework experts. > >> > >> > > >> > Also, I'd like to take the final patchset for 3.2, > >> Ok good! > >> > >> > but I don't feel > >> > confident enough about the OMAP patches. > >> The OMAP patches have been reviewed a few times already and the > >> comments have been taken into account. Also i has been tested > >> correctly on OMAP3. > >> > >> > If you want me to take them too, > >> > please make sure they are ACKed by the OMAP maintainers. > >> For sure I need the Acks. I guess I now need to annoy OMAP folks about it ;p > >> In the case the Acks are not gathered on time the generic patches > >> could be merged in, then the OMAP generic code. Do you think it is a > >> viable option? > > > > Yes, it is. I can take patches [1-7/15] alone. > > > >> The only concern I have is about the on-going OMAP PM initialization > >> clean-up task, cf. ToDo list: > >> >> 5. re-visit the OMAP power domains states initialization > >> procedure. Currently > >> >> the power states that have been changed from the constraints > >> API which were > >> >> applied before the initialization of the power domains are lost > >> > >> On the other hand some testing is needed on platforms other than OMAP, > >> because of the impact on the device insertion/removal in > >> device_pm_add/remove functions. I tested the SD card insertion/removal > >> on OMAP3. > > > > OK, so are you going to make any more changes to patches [1-7/15]? > I am now reworking [06/15] after your comments. > Is that OK timewise? It should be fine. I still need to have a closer look at [7/15] later today, I'll let you know if there's anything I'd like to change in there. Thanks, Rafael _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
