From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: catalin.marinas@arm.com (Catalin Marinas)
Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2016 18:11:52 +0100
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] efi: Introduce *_continue efi_memory_desc iterators
In-Reply-To: <57505F52.3040108@arm.com>
References: <1464707672-21882-1-git-send-email-catalin.marinas@arm.com>
 <1464707672-21882-2-git-send-email-catalin.marinas@arm.com>
 <20160601103446.GC9280@leverpostej>
 <20160601104326.GA24749@e104818-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
 <20160602143650.GG2658@codeblueprint.co.uk>
 <20160602162925.GC24938@e104818-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
 <57505F52.3040108@arm.com>
Message-ID: <20160602171152.GE24938@e104818-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On Thu, Jun 02, 2016 at 11:31:14AM -0500, Jeremy Linton wrote:
> On 06/02/2016 11:29 AM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> >On Thu, Jun 02, 2016 at 03:36:50PM +0100, Matt Fleming wrote:
> >>On Wed, 01 Jun, at 11:43:26AM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> >>>
> >>>Thanks for the heads up. I'll rebase the patches after -rc2 but anyway I
> >>>plan to merge them in 4.8 via the arm64 tree, including the patch above
> >>>if Matt acks it. So there is enough time to fix the conflicts.
> >>
> >>I'd really prefer it if you didn't take this series through the arm64
> >>tree, unless there are existing dependencies, of course.
> >>
> >>There were a number of conflicts in 3 different maintainer trees in
> >>linux-next before the most recent merge window opened, and extra work
> >>was required to sort that out. I want to avoid that in the future, so
> >>expect me to be more insistent about keeping EFI patches in the EFI
> >>tree than I have been in the past.
> >>
> >>Do arm64 prerequisites exist for this series? Or are you planning on
> >>adding dependencies on top?
> >
> >I don't know when Jeremy plans to submit his contiguous PTE patches (we
> >rejected them on the grounds of unnecessary huge page splitting, hence
> >this series). If he's not targeting 4.8, I'm happy for the patches to go
> >in via the EFI tree.
> 
> I can re-post them again for 4.8. They seem to get simpler every time!

I think you should post them fairly soon so that we get a chance to
review them and ideally push into next around -rc4.

Regarding these efi/arm64 patches, I can push them to a branch (once the
conflicting efi/urgent patches hit upstream, I guess around -rc2) that
Matt can pull into the EFI tree and I can also pull in the arm64 tree
*if* we are to merge the Jeremy's patches.

Jeremy, you can base your patches on such branch (I'll follow up with
the details if that's ok with Matt).

-- 
Catalin