From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Hanjun Guo Subject: Re: ACPI and PM material for v3.15-rc1 (current queue) Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2014 08:39:39 +0800 Message-ID: <532B8A4B.9000808@linaro.org> References: <2611540.GrpzWjVQ7v@vostro.rjw.lan> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: <2611540.GrpzWjVQ7v@vostro.rjw.lan> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: ACPI Devel Maling List , Linux PM list , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux PCI , Bjorn Helgaas List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org Hi Rafael, On 2014=E5=B9=B403=E6=9C=8821=E6=97=A5 08:23, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > Hi All, > > My queue for the first pull request during the upcoming 3.15 merge wi= ndow > contains the material below. Following the rule that everything I se= nd > pull requests for should spend at least one day in linux-next, I'm no= t > going to add any more new commits to it at this point. > > Most likely, there will be more ACPI+PM pull request during the 3.15 = cycle, > so if I missed something, it still may be possible to get that into t= hat > kernel, but there has to be a good reason for it. > > Kind regards, > Rafael > > > --------------- > > Hanjun Guo (2): > ACPI / tables: Replace printk with pr_* > ACPI: Remove duplicate definitions of PREFIX It seems that you missed some of my patches: ACPI: Move BAD_MADT_ENTRY() to linux/acpi.h ACPI / idle: Make idle_boot_override depend on x86 and ia64 ACPI / trivial: Fix the return value type of acpi_processor_eval_pdc() ACPI / processor: Replace hard-coded "ACPI0007" with=20 ACPI_PROCESSOR_DEVICE_HID I think those 4 patches can be merged in 3.15 and you already accepted = them. and this patch still need more acks and then you will accept it: ACPI / processor_core: Rework _PDC related stuff to make it more=20 arch-independent and this patch was reverted from your tree suggested by Catalin and Sud= eep, ACPI / processor: Introduce map_gic_id() to get apic id from MADT or=20 _MAT method Sorry for the confusion if I missed something. Thanks Hanjun