On 2017/1/16 22:14, Marc Zyngier wrote: > On 16/01/17 14:07, Agustin Vega-Frias wrote: >> Hi Rafael, >> >> On 2017-01-03 16:56, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >>> On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 4:19 PM, Agustin Vega-Frias >>> <agustinv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> Is there any more feedback on this beyond Lorenzo's suggestion to drop >>>> the conditional check on the first patch? >>>> How can we move forward on this series? >>> Essentially, I need to convince myself that patches [1-2/3] are fine >>> which hasn't happened yet. >> Pinging again. Do you have any questions that might help with your >> review? I have some minor changes I have to make to the driver itself >> (patch 3) and I'd like to submit any changes you might want along with >> those. > I'd like to add that these two initial patches are now a prerequisite > for Hanjun's series, so it'd be good to have an idea of where we're > going on that front. Is it helpful to test patch [1-2/3] on x86 machines (with different firmware) and an IA64 machine (surely a different version of firmware :) ) with Lorenzo's suggestion of removing #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI_GENERIC_GSI for is_gsi()? If yes, I can do that as I have such machines. Thanks 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
