On Tue, Oct 24, 2023 at 5:15 PM Russell King (Oracle) <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi, > > I'm posting James' patch set updated with most of the review comments > from his RFC v2 series back in September. Individual patches have a > changelog attached at the bottom of the commit message. Those which > I have finished updating have my S-o-b on them, those which still have > outstanding review comments from RFC v2 do not. In some of these cases > I've asked questions and am waiting for responses. > > I'm posting this as RFC v3 because there's still some unaddressed > comments and it's clearly not ready for merging. Even if it was ready > to be merged, it is too late in this development cycle to be taking > this change in, so there would be little point posting it non-RFC. > Also James stated that he's waiting for confirmation from the > Kubernetes/Kata folk - I have no idea what the status is there. > > I will be sending each patch individually to a wider audience > appropriate for that patch - apologies to those missing out on this > cover message. I have added more mailing lists to the series with the > exception of the acpica list in a hope of this cover message also > reaching those folk. > > The changes that aren't included are: > > 1. Updates for my patch that was merged via Thomas (thanks!): > c4dd854f740c cpu-hotplug: Provide prototypes for arch CPU registration > rather than having this change spread through James' patches. > > 2. New patch - simplification of PA-RISC's smp_prepare_boot_cpu() > > 3. Moved "ACPI: Use the acpi_device_is_present() helper in more places" > and "ACPI: Rename acpi_scan_device_not_present() to be about > enumeration" to the beginning of the series - these two patches are > already queued up for merging into 6.7. > > 4. Moved "arm64, irqchip/gic-v3, ACPI: Move MADT GICC enabled check into > a helper" to the beginning of the series, which has been submitted, > but as yet the fate of that posting isn't known. > > The first four patches in this series are provided for completness only. > > There is an additional patch in James' git tree that isn't in the set > of patches that James posted: "ACPI: processor: Only call > arch_unregister_cpu() if HOTPLUG_CPU is selected" which looks to me to > be a workaround for arch_unregister_cpu() being under the ifdef. I've > commented on this on the RFC v2 posting making a suggestion, but as yet > haven't had any response. > > I've included almost all of James' original covering body below the > diffstat. > > The reason that I'm doing this is to help move this code forward so > hopefully it can be merged - which is why I have been keen to dig out > from James' patches anything that can be merged and submit it > separately, since this is a feature for which some users have a > definite need for. I've gone through the series and there is at least one thing in it that concerns me a lot and some others that at least appear to be really questionable. I need more time to send comments which I'm not going to do before the 6.7 merge window (sorry), but from what I can say right now, this is not looking good. Thanks!
