On Wed, May 18, 2022 at 9:41 PM Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi Rafael, > > On Wed, May 18, 2022 at 09:07:31PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Wed, May 18, 2022 at 6:14 PM Sakari Ailus > > <sakari.ailus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > Hi Rafael, > > > > > > On Tue, May 17, 2022 at 06:21:44PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > > On Fri, May 6, 2022 at 2:58 PM Sakari Ailus > > > > <sakari.ailus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > acpi_get_handle() uses the pathname argument to find a handle related to > > > > > that pathname but it does not need to modify it. Make it const, in order > > > > > to be able to pass const pathname to it. > > > > > > > > > > Cc: "Moore, Robert" <robert.moore@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > Which patches in the rest of the series depend on this one? > > > > > > "ACPI: property: Parse data node string references in properties", i.e. > > > patch 8 in this set. > > > > So I think I can apply the rest of the series, except for patch 8 and > > patch 7 (as per the previous discussion) for the upcoming merge > > window. > > > > Would that work? > > I suppose it would apply to this one, too? Patch [2/11] will come to the kernel from upstream ACPICA at one point. > Postponing these works for me. So I tried to apply the series without patches [2,7-8/11], but that didn't work (patch [9/11] did not apply). Please resubmit without them or let's defer the entire series until we get patch [2/11] from ACPICA.
