Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v16 4/6] soc: qcom: rpmh: Invoke rpmh_flush() for dirty caches | From | Maulik Shah <> | Date | Sun, 12 Apr 2020 19:40:52 +0530 |
| |
Hi,
On 4/10/2020 8:22 PM, Doug Anderson wrote: > Hi, > > On Thu, Apr 9, 2020 at 9:15 PM Stephen Boyd <swboyd@chromium.org> wrote: >>> int rpmh_flush(struct rpmh_ctrlr *ctrlr) >> This function name keeps throwing me off. Can we please call it >> something like rpmh_configure_tcs_sleep_wake()? The word "flush" seems >> to imply there's some sort of cache going on, but that's not really the >> case. We're programming a couple TCS FIFOs so that they can be used >> across deep CPU sleep states. > I'm hoping this rename can be deferred until Maulik's series and my > cleanup series land. While I agree that rpmh_flush() is a bit of a > confusing name, it's not a new name and renaming it midway through > when there are a bunch of patches in-flight is going to be a hassle. > > Assuming others agree, my thought is that Maulik will do one more v17 > spin with small nits fixed up, then his series can land early next > week when (presumably) -rc1 comes out. If my current cleanup doesn't > apply cleanly (or if Bjorn/Andy don't want to fix the two nits in > commit messages when applying) I can repost my series and that can > land in short order. Once those land: > > * Maulik can post this rpmh_flush() rename atop. > > * I can post the patch to remove the "pm_lock" that was introduced in > this series. A preview at <https://crrev.com/c/2142823>. > > * Maulik can post some of the cleanups that Maulik wanted to do in > rpmh.c with regards to __fill_rpmh_msg() > > ...assuming those are not controversial perhaps they can be reviewed > quickly and land quickly? I suppose I can always dream... > > > -Doug
Agree, I can defer rename until this series lands and then post above listed changes.
Thanks, Maulik
-- QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation
| |