On Mon, 2018-09-17 at 17:52 +0100, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote: > On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 04:01:21PM +0000, Leonard Crestez wrote: > > On Mon, 2018-09-17 at 16:09 +0100, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote: > > > On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 07:50:14PM +0300, Leonard Crestez wrote: > > > > V4 adds 4 more patches with PME_Turn_Off support on top, using a new > > > > reset bit. I generally try to keep series short but in this case some > > > > planning might be needed to get patches into 4.20. > > > > > > > > Since the new reset is treated as optional with old DTB there should be > > > > again no problem if reset and pci are merged out of order. > > > > > > > > Shawn/Philipp/Lorenzo: Would it make sense to merge this series through a > > > > single specific tree, such as the one for imx? > > > > > > This series is a bit of a mixture of multiple things hard to discern > > > (actually I already merged patch 2 and patch 1 seems completely > > > unrelated). > > > > > > I would take the series through the PCI tree but I need an ACK for > > > patches 5 and 6, please let me know how you want to handle it. > > > > Patches 1 and 2 are already in, the rest need review. I can now just > > resend patches 3-6 as a separate series, unless somebody complains > > about spam. > > What do you mean by "are already in" ? Patch 2 I queued via the PCI > tree, patch 1 ? Can I drop it from the PCI patch queue ? Sorry, what I meant here is "accepted by a maintainer". So keep patch 2 please; patch 1 was accepted by Shawn few weeks ago. > I do not think there is any need to resend, I can merge patches 3-4 > since they have been reviewed but patches 5 and 6 need review. Patches 3-4 were acked by Rob Herring mostly from the devicetree perspective. Since patches 3-6 are not useful independently somebody like Lucas should review the whole series and then it can be merged. -- Regards, Leonard
