On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 10:46:09AM -0800, Olof Johansson wrote: > On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 9:12 AM, Will Deacon <will.dea...@arm.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 08:58:14AM -0800, Olof Johansson wrote: > >> On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 01:55:51PM +0000, Suzuki K. Poulose wrote: > >> > On 23/02/16 11:40, Will Deacon wrote: > >> > >On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 10:49:42AM +0000, Suzuki K Poulose wrote: > >> > >>Here are some fixes and updates for arm-cci pmu driver targeting v4.6, > >> > >>applies on top of v4.5-rc5. > >> > >> > >> > >>Highlights include : > >> > >> - Support for CoreLink CCI-550 PMU > >> > >> - Reliable writes to PMU Counter registers for CCI-500/550. > >> > >> > >> > >>All the patches have been Acked. Please let me know how this > >> > >>can be merged. > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/cci.txt | 2 + > >> > >> drivers/bus/Kconfig | 10 +- > >> > >> drivers/bus/arm-cci.c | 612 > >> > >> +++++++++++++++++-------- > >> > >> 3 files changed, 427 insertions(+), 197 deletions(-) > >> > > > >> > >How do you plan to merge this? I can take it all onto a branch for > >> > >arm-soc, or I can include it on my perf/updates branch, or ...? > >> > > >> > Arnd, Olof, > >> > > >> > What do you think would be the best route ? > >> > >> Traditionally we've been picking these up in arm-soc in our drivers branch. > >> > >> Will, unless you want them in your tree for some reason that's what I'll do > >> here as well. > > > > Just that I already have some CPU PMU patches that I planned to send, so > > I could bundle these in with those if necessary. I have no preference > > either way though, as long as they get queued someplace. > > Ok, I'm alright with you queueing these if that makes it easier. Feel > free to add: > > Acked-by: Olof Johansson <o...@lixom.net>
Thanks, Olof. I'll queue them shortly. > Only concern is if we cause confusion on where people should send > these patches down the road, but there aren't that many authors of > them so it's not a huge problem. Yup. It's pretty much a handful of @arm.com people. > > At some point, those drivers should be largely moved from drivers/bus/ > > to drivers/perf/, but that's a separate issue. > > And with a maintainer on that, that'd resolve the "where do I send > this" issue. The maintainer, of course, needs to know where to feed > things next, but that's easier to solve. I'm down for the arm-pmu.c, so I'm happy to own the interconnect PMUs too, but I'll need to sit down and extract the drivers first. Will
