From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Robert Richter Subject: Re: [PATCH V17 00/11] Add UEFI 2.6 and ACPI 6.1 updates for RAS on ARM64 Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2017 15:00:25 +0200 Message-ID: <20170621130025.GD16981@rric.localdomain> References: <1495225933-4410-1-git-send-email-tbaicar@codeaurora.org> <20170607115012.GZ30263@arm.com> <20170620063439.GS658@rric.localdomain> <20170620084931.GB30664@arm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mail-bl2nam02on0083.outbound.protection.outlook.com ([104.47.38.83]:62388 "EHLO NAM02-BL2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750992AbdFUNAt (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 Jun 2017 09:00:49 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170620084931.GB30664@arm.com> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Will Deacon Cc: Tyler Baicar , christoffer.dall@linaro.org, marc.zyngier@arm.com, pbonzini@redhat.com, rkrcmar@redhat.com, linux@armlinux.org.uk, catalin.marinas@arm.com, rjw@rjwysocki.net, lenb@kernel.org, matt@codeblueprint.co.uk, robert.moore@intel.com, lv.zheng@intel.com, nkaje@codeaurora.org, zjzhang@codeaurora.org, mark.rutland@arm.com, james.morse@arm.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, eun.taik.lee@samsung.com, sandeepa.s.prabhu@gmail.com, labbott@redhat.com, shijie.huang@arm.com, rruigrok@codeaurora.org, paul.gortmaker@windriver.com, tn@semihalf.com, fu.wei@linaro.org, rostedt@goodmis.org, bristot@redhat.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-efi@vger. On 20.06.17 09:49:32, Will Deacon wrote: > Hi Robert, > > On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 08:34:39AM +0200, Robert Richter wrote: > > On 07.06.17 12:50:12, Will Deacon wrote: > > > > > Thanks, I've pushed this out as: > > > > > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/arm64/linux.git for-next/ras-apei > > > > > > which I'll merge into for-next/core (and therefore linux-next) either the > > > end of this week or the beginning of next week. Please take a look if you > > > get a chance. > > > > any reason why there was a roll back of for-next/core? > > > > + 0870f692c2ed...e27c7fa015d6 for-next/core -> arm64/for-next/core (forced update) > > > > Is it because for-next/ras-apei goes through tip? > > No, it's because the RAS stuff ran into horrible conflicts with the UUID > tree: > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/6/16/22 > > Tyler should be rebasing that soon, so hopefully I can requeue that stuff > this week. Note there are also conflicts with tip-ras from Borsis' tree. -Robert