Re: [PATCH v13 0/3] perf: Add Raspberry Pi AXI PMU driver

On Mon, Aug 17, 2026 at 12:26 AM Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On 17/08/2026 08:57, Ian Rogers wrote:
> > On Sun, Aug 16, 2026 at 11:20 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 15/08/2026 19:27, Ian Rogers wrote:
> >>> Motivation & Background
> >>> ==============================
> >>> Currently, Linux lacks a standard perf-API compatible driver for the
> >>> Broadcom AXI performance counter blocks on Raspberry Pi platforms. Prior
> >>> out-of-tree vendor solutions relied on custom debugfs nodes and ad-hoc
> >>> kthreads, preventing integration with standard Linux perf tooling (`perf stat`,
> >>> `perf list`, etc.).
> >>>
> >>
> >> Slow down!
> >>
> >> One version per 24h in normal cycle, not 13 patchsets in two days! (and
> >> even rarer during the merge window)
> >
> > I'm familiar with perf-tools which was set up to follow BPF's example,
> > both have -next repos. The -next repos merge into linux-next for
> > testing. I agree that cherry-picking shouldn't be done straight into a
> > pull request to Linus. Is there a principle against using -next and
> > linux-next?
>
> How is this relevant? I don't think you read my comment.

I think I addressed all the points in your email. The -next
development is relevant because it directly addresses your point about
not sending emails during a merge window. Except when the -next branch
is becoming the main branch, merging patches at will is acceptable and
you also benefit from the linux-next testing. Not sending patches 5
times a year during the two-week merge window, it is nice to think
that this timetable fits everybody.

Thanks,
Ian

> Best regards,
> Krzysztof