On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 10:27:06PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Saturday, June 15, 2013 08:29:42 PM Daniel Vetter wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > So to me it looks like the discussion is going in circles a bit, hence let > > me drop my maintainer-opinion here: > > > > 1. Matthew's patch series here looks reasonable, and if it fixes a bunch > > of systems (which it seems to) it has my Ack and imo should go in. If acpi > > maintainers can smash their Ack onto the acpi parts I'd very much like to > > merge this into drm-intel-next, that should give us the most coverage for > > intel systems. > > > > Len, Rafael, are you ok with the acpi part of this and merging it through > > drm-intel-next? > > It has to go through the ACPI tree because of the ACPICA patch that needs to > be synchronized with the ACPICA upstream. Sorry. No problem, since we're pretty close to the merge window that would have at most resulted in a few more weeks of testing in i915 trees anyway. -rc kernels should still give us plenty of time to catch fallout, if there is any. > That said, I'm going to take this patchset. Thanks, Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch -- 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
