On Tue, 2015-03-03 at 11:37 +0800, Li, Aubrey wrote: > On 2015/2/23 20:45, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > On Tue, 2015-01-20 at 23:49 +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > >> This is the reworked patch series which had been sent earlier [1] to support > >> Intel CherryTrail SoC. > >> > >> The patches were tested on both BayTrail and CherryTrail SoCs. > >> > >> [1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/5235891/ > > > > Aubrey, is everything is clear for you now? Can I send v3 with your > > Ack's? > The patches overall look good to me, except a few minor comments need to > be addressed in the last conversation. For example, I think we don't > need patch 1/4 if we won't use dev_print. We still use them. Like I said the patch has no relations to the series, though it simplifies already existing function. > some other changes might be > necessary only if they makes code cleaner and works better. Thus, I think the patch 1/4 is still useful. > Certainly, it would be better if other x86 maintainers can take a look > at these patches. Agree. -- Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxx> Intel Finland Oy -- 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
