Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 26 Feb 2024 12:07:53 -0500 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/2] platform/mellanox: mlxbf-pmc: Fix module loading | From | Luiz Capitulino <> |
| |
On 2024-02-26 11:59, Ilpo Järvinen wrote: > On Mon, 26 Feb 2024, Luiz Capitulino wrote: > >> On 2024-02-26 11:04, Ilpo Järvinen wrote: >>> On Mon, 26 Feb 2024, Luiz Capitulino wrote: >>> >>>> On 2024-02-26 08:27, Ilpo Järvinen wrote: >>>>> On Thu, 22 Feb 2024 15:57:28 -0500, Luiz Capitulino wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> The mlxbf-pmc driver fails to load when the firmware reports a new but >>>>>> not >>>>>> yet implemented performance block. I can reproduce this today with a >>>>>> Bluefield-3 card and UEFI version 4.6.0-18-g7d063bb-BId13035, since >>>>>> this >>>>>> reports the new clock_measure performance block. >>>>>> >>>>>> This[1] patch from Shravan implements the clock_measure support and >>>>>> will >>>>>> solve the issue. But this series avoids the situation by ignoring and >>>>>> logging unsupported performance blocks. >>>>>> >>>>>> [...] >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Thank you for your contribution, it has been applied to my local >>>>> review-ilpo branch. Note it will show up in the public >>>>> platform-drivers-x86/review-ilpo branch only once I've pushed my >>>>> local branch there, which might take a while. >>>> >>>> Thank you Ilpo and thanks Hans for the review. >>>> >>>> The only detail is that we probably want this merged for 6.8 since >>>> the driver doesn't currently load with the configuration mentioned above. >>> >>> Oh, sorry, I missed the mention in the coverletter. >>> >>> So you'd want I drop these from review-ilpo branch as there they end >>> up into for-next branch, and they should go through Hans instead who >>> handles fixes branch for this cycle? >> >> If that's the path to get this series merged for this cycle then yes, >> but let's see if Hans agrees (sorry that I didn't know this before >> posting). >> >> One additional detail is that this series is on top of linux-next, which >> has two additional mlxbf-pmc changes: >> >> * >> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/39be055af3506ce6f843d11e45d71620f2a96e26.1707808180.git.shravankr@nvidia.com/ >> * >> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/d8548c70339a29258a906b2b518e5c48f669795c.1707808180.git.shravankr@nvidia.com/ >> >> Maybe those two should be included for 6.8 as well? > > Those look a new feature to me so they belong to for-next. So no, they > will not end up into 6.8 (to fixes branch). If the 2 patches in this > series do not apply without some for-next targetting dependencies, you > should rebase on top of fixes branch and send a new version.
Understood.
> About those two patches, please also see my reply. I intentionally only 2 > patches of that series because I wanted to see sysfs documentation first > so you should resend those two patches to for-next with sysfs > documentation.
I'm actually not author of the other patches :)
- Luiz
| |