From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Subject: Re: [PATCH] acpi: drop support for force_remove Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2017 15:54:43 +0200 Message-ID: References: <20170403074023.29121-1-mhocko@kernel.org> <20170410171343.GO4618@dhcp22.suse.cz> <3644128.Y1GtXNQdkv@aspire.rjw.lan> <20170411122016.GK6729@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20170411135233.GO6729@dhcp22.suse.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20170411135233.GO6729@dhcp22.suse.cz> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Michal Hocko Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Joey Lee , Jiri Kosina , Kani Toshimitsu , Len Brown , LKML , ACPI Devel Maling List , linux-api@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-api@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 3:52 PM, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Tue 11-04-17 15:48:04, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 2:20 PM, Michal Hocko wrote: >> > On Tue 11-04-17 00:15:42, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > [...] >> >> I'll apply it if nobody has any problems with it. >> > >> > It is definitely your call but how long are we going to wait >> > (considering that the current behavior is obviously broken wrt memory >> > hotplug)? >> >> A couple of days more? Surely not going to push it into 4.11 at this >> stage as it is an ABI change. > > Ohh, I didn't want to push it to 4.11 this late but having it in > linux-next might help to catch some users who are not following the > mailing list. Going to 4.12 would be really great but I wouldn't really > object even 4.13... 4.12 is probably fine. I don't see a compelling reason to sit on this for a whole cycle, FWIW. Thanks, Rafael