On Friday, June 06, 2008 8:01 pm Len Brown wrote: > On Thu, 5 Jun 2008, Jesse Barnes wrote: > > On Wednesday, June 04, 2008 4:14 pm Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > The following four patches have been sent to Len for a couple of times, > > > but he hasn't taken them. Still, as they are targeted at 2.6.27, I'd > > > like them to get some testing in linux-next. > > > > > > The first patch is against ACPI, but PCI is one of the two users of the > > > function it modifies (the other one is PNP). The next patch is > > > directly related to PCI, but depends on [1/4] (IIRC). > > > > > > The last two patches, [3/4] and [4/4], are technically agaist ACPI, but > > > [4/4] depends on the patches that introduce the new PM callbacks, > > > already in your tree, so it seems reasonable to merge them through your > > > tree to avoid conflicts with ACPI. > > > > > > Please include these patches into your tree if possible. > > > > Sure, I can take 1, 2 and 4, but 3 seems totally ACPI specific. Len can > > you pick it up? > > Jesse, > simplest thing i think is to pull from my suspend branch, > merge that with your dependent PCI change, and then add #4. > > if any of these patches need revision or re-basing, then > we'll need to coordinate, otherwise the tools should be happy. > > cheers, > -Len > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/lenb/linux-acpi-2.6.git > suspend Ok, I pulled your suspend branch into my linux-next branch. Rafael, can you re-spin #4 against that and send it over? Thanks, Jesse -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
