[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <93210832-aa75-7639-c9d2-99ec802d88e4@amd.com>
Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2026 09:35:04 -0800
From: Lizhi Hou <lizhi.hou@....com>
To: Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com>
CC: Shyam Sundar S K <Shyam-sundar.S-k@....com>, <ogabbay@...nel.org>,
<quic_jhugo@...cinc.com>, <maciej.falkowski@...ux.intel.com>, Hans de Goede
<hansg@...nel.org>, <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>, LKML
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <max.zhen@....com>, <sonal.santan@....com>,
<mario.limonciello@....com>, <platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org>,
<VinitKumar.Shukla@....com>, Patil Rajesh Reddy <Patil.Reddy@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 1/2] platform/x86/amd/pmf: Introduce new interface to
export NPU metrics
On 1/6/26 09:09, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
> On Tue, 6 Jan 2026, Lizhi Hou wrote:
>
>> What should be the next step? Should I generate both patches based on
>> review-ilpo-next? Will the amdxdna change upstream through platform-x86 tree?
> (We seemed to have crossed emails.)
>
> That would work for me too, but I thought it was wanted that patch 2 to
> go through accel?
Thanks a lot. Glad to know patch 1 is good and I will not post another
one. :)
The patch 2 depends on patch1. I agree that patch 2 to go through accel
which can avoid conflict with other recent amdxdna driver changes. So I
can wait the patch 1 to be upstream and reach to drm-misc, then submit
patch 2 there. Does it sound a right plan?
Thanks,
Lizhi
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists