On Thursday, October 4, 2018 10:58:53 AM CEST Ulf Hansson wrote: > On 4 October 2018 at 10:39, Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 3, 2018 at 4:39 PM Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> I have digested the review comments so far, including a recent offlist chat > >> with with Lorenzo Pieralisi around the debatable PSCI changes. More or less I > >> have a plan for how to move forward. > >> > >> However, to avoid re-posting non-changed patches over and over again, I decided > >> to withhold the more debatable part from this v9, hence this is not the complete > >> series to make things play. In v9, I have just included the trivial changes, > >> which are either already acked/reviewed or hopefully can be rather soon/easily. > >> > >> My hope is to get this queued for v4.20, to move things forward. I know it's > >> late, but there are more or less nothing new here since v8. > > > > I have no problems with the first three patches in this series, so I > > can apply them right away. Do you want me to do that? > > Yes, please. > > > > > As for the rest, the cpuidle driver patch looks OK to me, but the > > PSCI-related ones need ACKs. > > For some yes, but I think you can go ahead with a few more. > > Patch 4, 5 is already acked/reviewed. > > Patch 6 should be fine (if you are okay with it else wait for an ack > from Daniel) OK, thanks. Do the 4-6 depend on the 1-3? > Patch 7 and 8 should be fine. They were suggested by Mark. I'd rather have ACKs on these two as well. > Patch 9 and 10 needs acks. > > Patch 11 has been acked, but depends on the other PSCI changes. OK
