| Message ID | 20220529181329.2345722-1-michael@walle.cc (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| Headers | show |
| Series | arm64: remove generic ARM cpuidle support | expand |
On 29/05/2022 20:13, Michael Walle wrote: > Playing with an own PSCI implementation, I've noticed that the cpuidle-arm > driver doesn't work on arm64. It doesn't probe because since commit > 788961462f34 ("ARM: psci: cpuidle: Enable PSCI CPUidle driver") the > arm_cpuidle_init() can only return -EOPNOTSUPP, because the commit removed > the cpu_idle_init and cpu_suspend ops. > > It left me puzzled for quite some time. It seems that the cpuidle-psci is > the preferred one and this has been the case for quite some time. The > mentioned commit first appeared in v5.4. > > Remove the ARM64 support for the cpuidle-arm driver, which then let us > remove all the supporting arch code. > > Michael Walle (2): > cpuidle: cpuidle-arm: remove arm64 support > arm64: cpuidle: remove generic cpuidle support > > arch/arm64/include/asm/cpu_ops.h | 9 --------- > arch/arm64/include/asm/cpuidle.h | 15 --------------- > arch/arm64/kernel/cpuidle.c | 29 ----------------------------- > drivers/cpuidle/Kconfig.arm | 3 ++- > 4 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 54 deletions(-) Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
Am 2022-05-29 20:13, schrieb Michael Walle: > Playing with an own PSCI implementation, I've noticed that the > cpuidle-arm > driver doesn't work on arm64. It doesn't probe because since commit > 788961462f34 ("ARM: psci: cpuidle: Enable PSCI CPUidle driver") the > arm_cpuidle_init() can only return -EOPNOTSUPP, because the commit > removed > the cpu_idle_init and cpu_suspend ops. > > It left me puzzled for quite some time. It seems that the cpuidle-psci > is > the preferred one and this has been the case for quite some time. The > mentioned commit first appeared in v5.4. > > Remove the ARM64 support for the cpuidle-arm driver, which then let us > remove all the supporting arch code. > > Michael Walle (2): > cpuidle: cpuidle-arm: remove arm64 support > arm64: cpuidle: remove generic cpuidle support > > arch/arm64/include/asm/cpu_ops.h | 9 --------- > arch/arm64/include/asm/cpuidle.h | 15 --------------- > arch/arm64/kernel/cpuidle.c | 29 ----------------------------- > drivers/cpuidle/Kconfig.arm | 3 ++- > 4 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 54 deletions(-) Through which tree should this patchset go? I've seen it is marked as "Handled Elsewere" in the linux pm patchwork [1]. -michael [1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-pm/patch/20220529181329.2345722-2-michael@walle.cc/
On Wed, Jun 22, 2022 at 01:59:07PM +0200, Michael Walle wrote: > Am 2022-05-29 20:13, schrieb Michael Walle: > > Playing with an own PSCI implementation, I've noticed that the > > cpuidle-arm > > driver doesn't work on arm64. It doesn't probe because since commit > > 788961462f34 ("ARM: psci: cpuidle: Enable PSCI CPUidle driver") the > > arm_cpuidle_init() can only return -EOPNOTSUPP, because the commit > > removed > > the cpu_idle_init and cpu_suspend ops. > > > > It left me puzzled for quite some time. It seems that the cpuidle-psci > > is > > the preferred one and this has been the case for quite some time. The > > mentioned commit first appeared in v5.4. > > > > Remove the ARM64 support for the cpuidle-arm driver, which then let us > > remove all the supporting arch code. > > > > Michael Walle (2): > > cpuidle: cpuidle-arm: remove arm64 support > > arm64: cpuidle: remove generic cpuidle support > > > > arch/arm64/include/asm/cpu_ops.h | 9 --------- > > arch/arm64/include/asm/cpuidle.h | 15 --------------- > > arch/arm64/kernel/cpuidle.c | 29 ----------------------------- > > drivers/cpuidle/Kconfig.arm | 3 ++- > > 4 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 54 deletions(-) > > Through which tree should this patchset go? I've seen it is marked as > "Handled Elsewere" in the linux pm patchwork [1]. > Generally based on the changes, it is decided. I can see why Rafael would have marked so in PM patchwork. Daniel has already acked small change in CPUidle config file while the bulk is removal of arm64 code. So, it is better to route it via arm64 tree. Will, Assuming you will handle v5.20, can you pick this up ?
On Wed, Jun 22, 2022 at 03:07:48PM +0100, Sudeep Holla wrote: > On Wed, Jun 22, 2022 at 01:59:07PM +0200, Michael Walle wrote: > > Am 2022-05-29 20:13, schrieb Michael Walle: > > > Playing with an own PSCI implementation, I've noticed that the > > > cpuidle-arm > > > driver doesn't work on arm64. It doesn't probe because since commit > > > 788961462f34 ("ARM: psci: cpuidle: Enable PSCI CPUidle driver") the > > > arm_cpuidle_init() can only return -EOPNOTSUPP, because the commit > > > removed > > > the cpu_idle_init and cpu_suspend ops. > > > > > > It left me puzzled for quite some time. It seems that the cpuidle-psci > > > is > > > the preferred one and this has been the case for quite some time. The > > > mentioned commit first appeared in v5.4. > > > > > > Remove the ARM64 support for the cpuidle-arm driver, which then let us > > > remove all the supporting arch code. > > > > > > Michael Walle (2): > > > cpuidle: cpuidle-arm: remove arm64 support > > > arm64: cpuidle: remove generic cpuidle support > > > > > > arch/arm64/include/asm/cpu_ops.h | 9 --------- > > > arch/arm64/include/asm/cpuidle.h | 15 --------------- > > > arch/arm64/kernel/cpuidle.c | 29 ----------------------------- > > > drivers/cpuidle/Kconfig.arm | 3 ++- > > > 4 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 54 deletions(-) > > > > Through which tree should this patchset go? I've seen it is marked as > > "Handled Elsewere" in the linux pm patchwork [1]. > > > > Generally based on the changes, it is decided. I can see why Rafael would > have marked so in PM patchwork. Daniel has already acked small change in > CPUidle config file while the bulk is removal of arm64 code. So, it is > better to route it via arm64 tree. > > Will, > > Assuming you will handle v5.20, can you pick this up ? Yup, on it. Will
On Sun, 29 May 2022 20:13:27 +0200, Michael Walle wrote: > Playing with an own PSCI implementation, I've noticed that the cpuidle-arm > driver doesn't work on arm64. It doesn't probe because since commit > 788961462f34 ("ARM: psci: cpuidle: Enable PSCI CPUidle driver") the > arm_cpuidle_init() can only return -EOPNOTSUPP, because the commit removed > the cpu_idle_init and cpu_suspend ops. > > It left me puzzled for quite some time. It seems that the cpuidle-psci is > the preferred one and this has been the case for quite some time. The > mentioned commit first appeared in v5.4. > > [...] Applied to arm64 (for-next/cpuidle), thanks! [1/2] cpuidle: cpuidle-arm: remove arm64 support https://git.kernel.org/arm64/c/51280acad855 [2/2] arm64: cpuidle: remove generic cpuidle support https://git.kernel.org/arm64/c/471f80db9ef1 Cheers,
Playing with an own PSCI implementation, I've noticed that the cpuidle-arm driver doesn't work on arm64. It doesn't probe because since commit 788961462f34 ("ARM: psci: cpuidle: Enable PSCI CPUidle driver") the arm_cpuidle_init() can only return -EOPNOTSUPP, because the commit removed the cpu_idle_init and cpu_suspend ops. It left me puzzled for quite some time. It seems that the cpuidle-psci is the preferred one and this has been the case for quite some time. The mentioned commit first appeared in v5.4. Remove the ARM64 support for the cpuidle-arm driver, which then let us remove all the supporting arch code. Michael Walle (2): cpuidle: cpuidle-arm: remove arm64 support arm64: cpuidle: remove generic cpuidle support arch/arm64/include/asm/cpu_ops.h | 9 --------- arch/arm64/include/asm/cpuidle.h | 15 --------------- arch/arm64/kernel/cpuidle.c | 29 ----------------------------- drivers/cpuidle/Kconfig.arm | 3 ++- 4 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 54 deletions(-)