lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Aug]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH v9 1/2] regulator: dt-bindings: add QCOM RPMh regulator bindings
Mark,

On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 11:39 AM, Andy Gross <andy.gross@linaro.org> wrote:
> + olof
>
> On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 05:59:42PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 08:43:46AM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote:
>> > On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 8:25 AM, Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> wrote:
>>
>> > > There was also some other thing called command DB as well which was a
>> > > separate series. Ideally there'd be a branch I could pull as there's a
>> > > build dependency on rpmh so I can't apply until the code has landed in
>> > > my tree, don't know what command DB is exactly.
>>
>> > Yup. That one landed in May and is already in mainline Linux. Refer
>> > to commit 312416d9171a ("drivers: qcom: add command DB driver").
>>
>> That's good at least - the cover letter said it was still under review,
>> guess it just hadn't been updated.
>>
>> > Adding Andy to this thread (I guess he wasn't on it?). Hopefully he
>> > can provide you with the branch.
>>
> Mark,
>
> The arm-soc guys merged the Qualcomm pull requests. So you can just use my
> qcom-drivers-for-4.19 tag. That won't change at this point.
>
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/agross/linux.git
> qcom-drivers-for-4.19

Did Andy's idea of using the above tag work for you? It appears that
there are a few patches you don't need there, but it shouldn't hurt to
pick them up too I think? Here's what I see:

---

$ git log --oneline linux/master..qcom-drivers-for-4.19
78ee559d7fc6 (tag: qcom-drivers-for-4.19) soc: qcom: rmtfs-mem: fix
memleak in probe error paths
4da3b0452bc6 soc: qcom: llc-slice: Add missing MODULE_LICENSE()
6c805adf17d4 drivers: qcom: rpmh: fix unwanted error check for get_tcs_of_type()
efa1c257b3fc drivers: qcom: rpmh-rsc: fix the loop index check in
get_req_from_tcs
a0b1561f8461 firmware: qcom: scm: add a dummy qcom_scm_assign_mem()
fdd102b52cfd drivers: qcom: rpmh-rsc: Check cmd_db_ready() to help children
2de4b8d33eab drivers: qcom: rpmh-rsc: allow active requests from wake TCS
c8790cb6da58 drivers: qcom: rpmh: add support for batch RPMH request
564b5e24ccd4 drivers: qcom: rpmh: allow requests to be sent asynchronously
600513dfeef3 drivers: qcom: rpmh: cache sleep/wake state requests
9a3afcfbc0cc drivers: qcom: rpmh-rsc: allow invalidation of sleep/wake TCS
fa460e453a83 drivers: qcom: rpmh-rsc: write sleep/wake requests to TCS
c1038456b02b drivers: qcom: rpmh: add RPMH helper functions
fc087fe5a45e drivers: qcom: rpmh-rsc: log RPMH requests in FTRACE
2e4690a09fca dt-bindings: introduce RPMH RSC bindings for Qualcomm SoCs
658628e7ef78 drivers: qcom: rpmh-rsc: add RPMH controller for QCOM SoCs
a3134fb09e0b drivers: soc: Add LLCC driver
7e5700ae64f6 dt-bindings: Documentation for qcom, llcc
0b65c59e3a54 soc: qcom: smem: Correct check for global partition

---

It seems like it's too late to land RPMh-regulator for 4.19, so I
guess we'll have to aim for 4.20. I'm not sure if that means you're
going to want to wait until 4.20-rc1 comes out to use as a base before
thinking about landing RPMh-regulator? If so then I guess we've got
~3 weeks before something could land and we could start landing device
tree bits using RPMh-regulator. If that's the plan then we'll
probably just start landing things in the Chrome OS tree now and suck
up the extra work of trying to resolve differences later...

Thanks!

-Doug

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-08-07 00:56    [W:0.049 / U:0.960 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site