* Len Brown <lenb@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Ok, this iteration is even nicer. > > Thank you, Ingo, both for the thoughtful review, > and your kind words. > > > Reviewed-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> > > > > A patch technical request/suggestion. I guess you'd like to keep > > these bits in the ACPI tree, so that you can test it and merge it > > with ongoing ACPI changes, right? > > > > That would be fine to me for all the arch/x86/ touching patches, > > except for this one: > > > > [PATCH 05/11] ACPI, x86: expose some IO-APIC routines when CONFIG_ACPI=n > > > > I'd like to pick this one up into tip:x86/apic, because there's > > ongoing work in this area. (also, by the looks of it, i'd not be > > surprised if this patch needed some testing. This is fragile code > > with quirky Kconfig dependencies.) > > > > I can create a standalone topic for this (based on .31-rc6), > > containing this single commit, which you could pull into the ACPI > > tree? That way we both can have this commit and nobody is held up, > > and both trees can be pushed to Linus in the .32 merge window, > > independently of each other. > > Sure. > > Go ahead and pull that patch onto an 2.6.31-rc8 based branch from here: > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/lenb/linux-sfi-2.6.git for-ingo > > As the previous patches did not depend on it, I simply rebased > that one to rc8 and moved the other patches after it. Pulled, thanks Len! Ingo -- 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
