On Wed, Sep 24, 2025 at 11:10:33AM -0600, Mathieu Poirier wrote: >On Wed, 24 Sept 2025 at 09:35, Peng Fan <[email protected]> wrote: >> ... >> Sorry for early ping - I just wanted to check if there's any chance for this >> patchset to be included in 6.18, along with the other cleanup patchset [1]. > >It seems very unlikely. I am currently looking into how the PM >runtime framework behaves to address my own questions about this patch >[1]. Furthermore, I am worried about the usage of the device >management framework when it comes to freeing memory. I will get back >to you with comments on that front when I know we are doing the right >thing with the PM runtime framework.
I see. Not sure Ulf could help clarify or review, then you might take less time. > >I dropped the 3rd cleanup patchset. More than once I asked you to >submit only one patchset at a time and you still refuse to take notice >of my request. I apologize - I now recall your earlier request to hold off on submitting further patches until the table_sz clearing patch was clarified. I misunderstood and appreciate your patience. Could you please clarify whether there's a general rule in remoteproc that developers should only have one patchset or patch under review at a time? If so, would it be possible to document this guideline in the kernel documentation? That would help avoid confusion for contributors. I ask because I have other patches queued that are independent of the current series, such as: - Reintroducing the table_sz clearing - Misc cleanup in remoteproc core I understand you may be busy and have limited bandwidth. Would it be feasible to offload part of the review work to Bjorn? I rarely see Bjorn reviewing i.MX patches. Alternatively, could we consider bringing in a third maintainer to help accelerate the review process? Thanks again for your time and guidance. Thanks, Peng > >Mathieu > >[1]. "remoteproc: imx_rproc: Fix runtime PM cleanup order and error handling" > >> >> Both patchsets have received Reviewed-by tags, have been tested, and >> successfully passed builds (arm64 gcc) with each patch applied incrementally. >> >> [1] >> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-remoteproc/[email protected]/T/#ma16bb8a38300f6eb333ee04f00d57805aee3c114 >> >> Thanks >> Peng >> >> > >> > drivers/remoteproc/imx_rproc.c | 128 >> > ++++++++++++++++++----------------------- >> > 1 file changed, 57 insertions(+), 71 deletions(-) >> >--- >> >base-commit: c3067c2c38316c3ef013636c93daa285ee6aaa2e >> >change-id: 20250916-imx_rproc_c2-2b9ad7882f4d >> > >> >Best regards, >> >-- >> >Peng Fan <[email protected]> >> > >
