On 2014-11-19 1:03, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 05:02:05PM +0000, Sudeep Holla wrote:
>> On 18/11/14 16:57, Will Deacon wrote:
>>> On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 04:43:13PM +0000, Catalin Marinas wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 01:45:49PM +0000, Hanjun Guo wrote:
>>>>> On 2014年10月17日 21:36, Hanjun Guo wrote:
>>>>>> It always make sense to initialize CPU0's logical map entry from the
>>>>>> hardware values, so move the initialization of cpu_logical_map(0)
>>>>>> before unflatten_device_tree() which is needed by ACPI code later.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Acked-by: Olof Johansson <olof@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>> Acked-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@xxxxxxx>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>
>>>>> Could you merge this patch first in 3.19? It was acked by Olof and
>>>>> Mark, and it will make sense without ACPI too.
>>>>
>>>> I think it can go in for 3.19 (it's Will's turn this time ;)).
>>>
>>> This patch doesn't apply on for-next/core, as it conflicts with some of
>>> Rutland's rework ("arm64: log physical ID of boot CPU").
>>>
>>
>> It's actually not required anymore, as "arm64: log physical ID of boot
>> CPU" move it quite early in the sequence from setup_arch to
>> smp_setup_processor_id while this patch just moves it up in setup_arch.
>
> Thanks Sudeep, I'd guessed as much :)
That's great, thanks for the reminding, I will drop this one.
Best regards
Hanjun
--
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
