On Monday, January 14, 2013 02:21:38 PM Yinghai Lu wrote: > On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 1:33 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > The next three patches actually rework acpi_bus_trim() in three steps: > > > > [3/5] Drop the second argument of acpi_bus_trim() (all callers pass 1 in there > > anyway. > > [4/5] Reimplement acpi_bus_trim() using acpi_walk_namespace(). > > [3/5] Make acpi_bus_trim() carry out two passes as described above. > > > > I'm aware of the fact that this will conflict with the patches that Yinghai > > posted a few days ago, but in my opinion the changes here are prerequisite for > > the Yinghai's patchset. > > Sure, I will drop my change to acpi_bus_trim() and update one > reference accordingly. > > Acked-by: for those 5 patches. Thanks! > So you will put those patches in acpi-scan, and Bjorn will pull that > again to pci tree? I'm going to put them into acpi-scan some time later this week, but I'd like them to go through linux-next first to catch teething problems, if any. I can't speak for Bjorn, though. I suppose he will pull them if you ask him to. Thanks, Rafael -- I speak only for myself. Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center. -- 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
