[PATCH v16 00/40] NVIDIA Tegra power management patches for 5.17

[Dmitry Osipenko]

16.12.2021 16:14, Thierry Reding пишет:
> On Wed, Dec 15, 2021 at 07:11:53PM +0300, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
>> 15.12.2021 18:55, Thierry Reding пишет:
>>> On Wed, Dec 01, 2021 at 02:23:07AM +0300, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
>>>> This series adds runtime PM support to Tegra drivers and enables core
>>>> voltage scaling for Tegra20/30 SoCs, resolving overheating troubles.
>>>>
>>>> All patches in this series are interdependent and should go via Tegra tree
>>>> for simplicity.
>>>
>>> So these can be applied in any order without breaking anything?
>>
>> Please notice that the word is *inter* dependent, not *in* dependent.
>>
>> There is a build dependency for the patches. The first two "soc/tegra"
>> must be applied first.
> 
> Okay, so I've separated the first two patches out into a separate stable
> branch that I can share between the Tegra and drm/tegra trees to pull in
> the build dependency and then I've applied the driver patches to those
> two trees and I've verified that the two branches build correctly. I've
> not done any runtime testing, but I'll trust you on that.

I only compile-tested VIC and NVDEC drivers, but they should be okay,
and thus, everything should be good.

>> The "soc/tegra: pmc: Enable core domain support for Tegra20 and Tegra30"
>> *must* be the last applied patch if we want to preserve bisectability.
>> The core voltage scaling can be enabled only once all the drivers got
>> the power management support.
>>
>> The rest could be applied out-of-order.
> 
> One last remaining question: I don't think I can apply that one patch if
> it requires that all the others are enabled first because it would
> basically create a circular dependency.
> 
> Can I pick up the final 7 patches (the DT ones) independently of that
> one patch without things breaking? If so, one option we could try is to
> wait for both Tegra and drm/tegra trees to get merged into v5.17-rc1 and
> then send that one patch (which is only a 4-line diff) right after
> v5.17-rc1 so that it makes it into v5.17-rc2. That avoids the circular
> dependency and should get everything enabled for v5.17.
> 
> Do you see any problems with that?
Deferring that one patch till v5.17-rc2 will work, thank you.