mbox series

[GIT,PULL] firmware: arm_scmi: Updates for v5.11

Message ID 20201124122412.22386-1-sudeep.holla@arm.com
State New
Headers show
Series [GIT,PULL] firmware: arm_scmi: Updates for v5.11 | expand

Pull-request

git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/sudeep.holla/linux.git tags/scmi-updates-5.11

Message

Sudeep Holla Nov. 24, 2020, 12:24 p.m. UTC
Hi ARM SoC Team,

Please pull ! The tag is based on v5.10-rc2 to avoid conflicts with
the fixes that got merged in -rc2.

Note the hwmon is acked by Guenter to take the changes together.
Also note that the SCMI regulator driver itself is getting queued by
Mark Brown separately and hence I have sent him pull request with
'scmi-voltage-5.11' tag which I have also merged here.

Regards,
Sudeep

-->8

The following changes since commit 3cea11cd5e3b00d91caf0b4730194039b45c5891:

  Linux 5.10-rc2 (2020-11-01 14:43:51 -0800)

are available in the Git repository at:

  git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/sudeep.holla/linux.git tags/scmi-updates-5.11

for you to fetch changes up to f83eb664cdb45169338b9633f22eaafc23764f05:

  Merge tag 'scmi-voltage-5.11' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/sudeep.holla/linux into for-next/scmi (2020-11-23 16:37:27 +0000)

----------------------------------------------------------------
ARM SCMI updates for v5.11

Two main additions this time:
1. Support for SCMI v3.0 sensor extensions
2. Support for voltage domain management protocol added newly to SCMI v3.0

----------------------------------------------------------------
Cristian Marussi (10):
      firmware: arm_scmi: Rework scmi_sensors_protocol_init
      firmware: arm_scmi: Add SCMI v3.0 sensors descriptors extensions
      dt-bindings: arm: Add support for SCMI Regulators
      firmware: arm_scmi: Add voltage domain management protocol support
      firmware: arm_scmi: Add support to enumerated SCMI voltage domain device
      hwmon: (scmi) Update hwmon internal scale data type
      firmware: arm_scmi: Add SCMI v3.0 sensors timestamped reads
      firmware: arm_scmi: Add SCMI v3.0 sensor configuration support
      firmware: arm_scmi: Add SCMI v3.0 sensor notifications
      firmware: arm_scmi: Remove residual _le structs naming

Qinglang Miao (1):
      firmware: arm_scmi: Fix missing destroy_workqueue()

Sudeep Holla (2):
      firmware: arm_scmi: Add full list of sensor type enumeration
      Merge tag 'scmi-voltage-5.11' of git://git.kernel.org/.../sudeep.holla/linux into for-next/scmi

 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scmi.txt |  43 ++
 drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/Makefile                 |   2 +-
 drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/common.h                 |   1 +
 drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c                 |   3 +
 drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/notify.c                 |  10 +-
 drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/sensors.c                | 720 +++++++++++++++++++--
 drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/voltage.c                | 380 +++++++++++
 drivers/hwmon/scmi-hwmon.c                         |   2 +-
 include/linux/scmi_protocol.h                      | 352 +++++++++-
 9 files changed, 1450 insertions(+), 63 deletions(-)
 create mode 100644 drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/voltage.c

Comments

Arnd Bergmann Nov. 26, 2020, 8:54 p.m. UTC | #1
On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 1:24 PM Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> wrote:
>
> Hi ARM SoC Team,
>
> Please pull ! The tag is based on v5.10-rc2 to avoid conflicts with
> the fixes that got merged in -rc2.

Is there no way to avoid this? I would really prefer not to have to backmerge
rc2 into my existing branch if it's just about the bugfix.

I tried rebasing your branch onto -rc2 and only got a trivial conflict
in one line, and even that could be avoided by merging in your
bugfix branch instead of the whole -rc2.

     Arnd
Sudeep Holla Nov. 27, 2020, 10 a.m. UTC | #2
On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 09:54:50PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 1:24 PM Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi ARM SoC Team,
> >
> > Please pull ! The tag is based on v5.10-rc2 to avoid conflicts with
> > the fixes that got merged in -rc2.
> 
> Is there no way to avoid this? I would really prefer not to have to backmerge
> rc2 into my existing branch if it's just about the bugfix.
> 
> I tried rebasing your branch onto -rc2 and only got a trivial conflict
> in one line, and even that could be avoided by merging in your
> bugfix branch instead of the whole -rc2.
> 

Unfortunately the branch/tag I shared with Mark Brown to merge the voltage
regulator part is also based on -rc2. I might have to drop those patches
from this pull request if I need to rebase on -rc1. If that's OK, I can
send fresh/new PR based on -rc1. Sorry for the trouble.
Arnd Bergmann Nov. 27, 2020, 8:09 p.m. UTC | #3
On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 11:00 AM Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 09:54:50PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 1:24 PM Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi ARM SoC Team,
> > >
> > > Please pull ! The tag is based on v5.10-rc2 to avoid conflicts with
> > > the fixes that got merged in -rc2.
> >
> > Is there no way to avoid this? I would really prefer not to have to backmerge
> > rc2 into my existing branch if it's just about the bugfix.
> >
> > I tried rebasing your branch onto -rc2 and only got a trivial conflict
> > in one line, and even that could be avoided by merging in your
> > bugfix branch instead of the whole -rc2.
> >
>
> Unfortunately the branch/tag I shared with Mark Brown to merge the voltage
> regulator part is also based on -rc2. I might have to drop those patches
> from this pull request if I need to rebase on -rc1. If that's OK, I can
> send fresh/new PR based on -rc1. Sorry for the trouble.

I ended up doing the backmerge of v5.10-rc2 into arm/drivers and merged
your tag on top of that. I'll have to remember filtering out the changes
when I send my pull request to Linus, but otherwise this seems like
the lesser evil.

     Arnd
Sudeep Holla Nov. 28, 2020, 8:34 a.m. UTC | #4
On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 09:09:27PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 11:00 AM Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 09:54:50PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 1:24 PM Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi ARM SoC Team,
> > > >
> > > > Please pull ! The tag is based on v5.10-rc2 to avoid conflicts with
> > > > the fixes that got merged in -rc2.
> > >
> > > Is there no way to avoid this? I would really prefer not to have to backmerge
> > > rc2 into my existing branch if it's just about the bugfix.
> > >
> > > I tried rebasing your branch onto -rc2 and only got a trivial conflict
> > > in one line, and even that could be avoided by merging in your
> > > bugfix branch instead of the whole -rc2.
> > >
> >
> > Unfortunately the branch/tag I shared with Mark Brown to merge the voltage
> > regulator part is also based on -rc2. I might have to drop those patches
> > from this pull request if I need to rebase on -rc1. If that's OK, I can
> > send fresh/new PR based on -rc1. Sorry for the trouble.
> 
> I ended up doing the backmerge of v5.10-rc2 into arm/drivers and merged
> your tag on top of that. I'll have to remember filtering out the changes
> when I send my pull request to Linus, but otherwise this seems like
> the lesser evil.
> 

Thanks and extremely sorry for the trouble. I always try to base on -rc1.
Since I had seen Arm SoC pull requests on -rc2 sometimes due to other
dependencies, I thought -rc2 wasn't too bad. I will try to stick with -rc1
or fixes tag in future to keep it simple.