Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Saturday, February 16, 2013 01:52:00 AM Stephen Rothwell wrote: >> Hi Rafael, > > Hi, > >> On Fri, 15 Feb 2013 15:53:34 +0100 "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@xxxxxxx> >> wrote: >>> >>> On Saturday, February 16, 2013 12:50:14 AM Stephen Rothwell wrote: >>>> >>>> On Fri, 15 Feb 2013 08:26:24 -0500 Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk >>>> <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Thank you. I keep on forgetting - but would it be OK for me to >>>>> take this patch in my tree? Or should I not since this is a new >>>>> functionality that Rafael is going to introduce in v3.9? >>>> >>>> It is an API change in the pm tree that is not yet in Linus' tree. >>>> >>>>> And if so, perhaps I should tack it on in my tree, once Rafael >>>>> does a git pull to Linus? Or just point Linus to this git commit? >>>> >>>> You should point Linus at this patch if the pm tree is merged >>>> first, or >>>> Rafael should do the same if the reverse happens. >>> >>> Alternatively, Konrad can pull the acpi-scan branch containing the >>> changes in question from my tree into his tree and rebase the new >>> material on top of that. >> >> Or pull the acpi-scan branch into his tree and use my conflict >> resolution in the resulting merge thus requiring no rebasing. >> However, Linus likes to see such interactions, so it can be left up >> to when the latter of the two tress is merged by Linus. > > Well, I'm afraid this won't be sufficient this time, because of this > commit in my tree (which is not on the acpi-scan branch): > > commit 3757b94802fb65d8f696597a74053cf21738da0b > Author: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx> > Date: Wed Feb 13 14:36:47 2013 +0100 > > ACPI / hotplug: Fix concurrency issues and memory leaks > > after which acpi_bus_scan() and acpi_bus_trim() have to be run under > acpi_scan_lock (new in my tree as well). Yes, we noticed that and only need minor updates at xen side, will send out 2 xen patches later accordingly, for cleanup and adding lock. Thanks, Jinsong > > Moreover, I think that the introduction of ACPI-based CPU hotplug > into Xen and this point would be premature, because we need to rework > the original ACPI-based CPU hotplug and quite frankly it shouldn't > call acpi_bus_scan() directly at all. > > Konrad? > > Thanks, > Rafael -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
