On 2014-3-12 17:30, Graeme Gregory wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 09:29:47AM +0000, Graeme Gregory wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 05:16:24PM +0800, Hanjun Guo wrote:
>>> On 2014年03月12日 17:04, Graeme Gregory wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 04:17:21PM +0800, Hanjun Guo wrote:
>>>>> Hi Ashwin,
>>>>>
>>>>> On 2014-3-12 11:30, Ashwin Chaugule wrote:
>>>>>> Include the correct definitions for gic_acpi_init()
>>>>>> when building with CONFIG_ACPI=n.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Ashwin Chaugule <ashwin.chaugule@linaro.org>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>  arch/arm64/kernel/irq.c | 3 ++-
>>>>>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/irq.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/irq.c
>>>>> Which git repo of this patch set based on?
>>>>>
>>>> Hi Hanjun, Tomasz,
>>>>
>>>> Do you guys have an ETA on the next version of your patchset, I get
>>>> feeling you have already covered some of the changes Ashwin made.
>>>>
>>>> Would be good to get a newer version into acpi-mainline-core ASAP.
>>>
>>> Yes, we have a newer version, but haven't finished yet,
>>> My thinking is that we update the patches according to
>>> the new proposals to ASWG and send them out internally
>>> for review, how do you think about that?
>>>
>> Hi Hanjun,
>>
>> I think we need a version first which we can update acpi-mainline-core
>> with. Basically a latest version of what we currently have. Then we can
>> work on proto type changes.
>>
> Just to clarify I don't mean we need to send these upstream, just that
> we need to update the git repo.

I think we can merge Ashwin's patches into acpi-mainline-core and leave
alone the new version of patches, you know, v2 patches are still working,
is that ok?

Thanks
Hanjun

_______________________________________________
Linaro-acpi mailing list
Linaro-acpi@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-acpi