Re: state of some x86 acpi patches

[Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>]

Yinghai Lu wrote:
> Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
>   
>> Ingo Molnar wrote:
>>     
>>> yes, that end result is the desired state of things. We did run with
>>> this for several months and resolved all the cases that needed fixing,
>>> but dropped them when the ACPI tree moved out from under us.
>>>
>>> Can resurrect it if Len feels OK about the concept. Len, you shouldnt
>>> worry about conflicts - we can do it after the ACPI changes of this
>>> merge window are upstream so there should be no conflict trouble at
>>> all. How does that sound?
>>>   
>>>       
>> Doesn't look like these changes made it in this time.  Did they get
>> overlooked, or did some other problem come up?  Or did you want me to
>> dig them up?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>    J
>>     
>
>
> please check attached that are updated to today tip/master with ingo's genapic patchset..
>   

The look OK, but they didn't get merged into tip/master?

    J