Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > Yinghai Lu wrote: >> Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: >> >>> Ingo Molnar wrote: >>> >>>> yes, that end result is the desired state of things. We did run with >>>> this for several months and resolved all the cases that needed fixing, >>>> but dropped them when the ACPI tree moved out from under us. >>>> >>>> Can resurrect it if Len feels OK about the concept. Len, you shouldnt >>>> worry about conflicts - we can do it after the ACPI changes of this >>>> merge window are upstream so there should be no conflict trouble at >>>> all. How does that sound? >>>> >>> Doesn't look like these changes made it in this time. Did they get >>> overlooked, or did some other problem come up? Or did you want me to >>> dig them up? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> J >>> >> >> >> please check attached that are updated to today tip/master with ingo's >> genapic patchset.. >> > > The look OK, but they didn't get merged into tip/master? > Ingo is too busy... It seems Len already agreed those patches can go through tip. Ingo? YH -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
