On Mon, 2014-10-27 at 13:03 +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > > Yeah, I was struggling a bit with that. I think the agreement was that > everything EFI related goes through Matt's tree, but I don't think > that necessarily makes sense for patches that only touch arch/arm64, > unless there are interdependencies with the generic code. > > From this series, only patches #7 and #8 need to go through Matt's > tree, and even if #9 and #10 are also related to SMBIOS, they are in > fact orthogonal to #7 and #8, so those can still go through the arm64 > tree without any merge order issues later on. > > @Matt: any thoughts? In this case, if it makes things easier for you folks in terms of dependencies to take this *all* through the arm64 tree, that seems sensible to me. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-efi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
