On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 10:20 PM Andrew Lunn <andrew@xxxxxxx> wrote: > I think we need to NACK all attempts to add ACPI support to phylib and > phylink until an authoritative ACPI Linux maintainer makes an > appearance and actively steers the work. And not just this patchset, > but all patchsets in the networking domain which have an ACPI > component. It's funny, since I see ACPI mailing list and none of the maintainers in the Cc here... I'm not sure they pay attention to some (noise-like?) activity which (from their perspective) happens on unrelated lists. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
