[removed unintended disclaimer] On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 10:45:35PM -0700, Khuong Dinh wrote: > Hi Lorenzo, > > On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 6:38 AM, Lorenzo Pieralisi > <lorenzo.pieralisi@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi Khuong, > > > > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 02:19:50PM -0700, Khuong Dinh wrote: > >> Hi Lorenzo, > >> Do you have any comments for this patch? > > > > I'd have some comments but given that there are related issues with ACPI > > probe ordering that Marc is trying to solve on his side - I will work > > with him to see if we can accommodate changes that can solve this issue > > too. > > > > Again - I recognize it is a complex problem (that is not even > > contemplated by the current ACPI specs), we have to try to make > > the solution as generic as we can to prevent reinventing the wheel > > anytime a sligthly different issue (related to ACPI probe ordering) > > comes up. > > > > Leave it to me (us) and I will get back to you on this. > > Thanks for helping to take care of the generic ACPI probe ordering issue. > Given that the patch 'PCI/MSI: pci-xgene-msi: Enable MSI support in ACPI > boot for X-Gene v1" adds only the ACPI ID, can you pull in this patch > independently from the ACPI probe ordering issue? No. For two reasons: 1) It's Bjorn who decides whether that code can be merged or not, not me 2) That patch sneaks in ACPI MSI support for X-gene v1 that depends on kernel link ordering. As soon as it is pulled in the mainline it creates a dependency on pseudo-working code that may break anytime and as I said many times before I am not willing to rely on that. Lorenzo
