From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: mlangsdo@redhat.com (Mark Langsdorf)
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2015 13:49:52 -0600
Subject: [PATCH v7 00/17] Introduce ACPI for ARM64 based on ACPI 5.1
In-Reply-To: <1421247905-3749-1-git-send-email-hanjun.guo@linaro.org>
References: <1421247905-3749-1-git-send-email-hanjun.guo@linaro.org>
Message-ID: <54B819E0.1050508@redhat.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On 01/14/2015 09:04 AM, Hanjun Guo wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This is the v7 of ACPI core patches for ARM64 based on ACPI 5.1

> 1. Why we need ACPI on ARM64?
>
>    - Grant already posted a blog about this, and stated clearly
>      why we need ACPI on ARM64:
>
>      http://www.secretlab.ca/archives/151
>
>
> 2. What we need to do before the arm64 ACPI core patches
>     could be merged into the kernel?
>
>    - Al Stone posted a TODO list and updates v2 for the
>      progress we made:
>      http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg390069.html
>
>    - so from the progress we can see that we already finished
>      most of the items, and _OSI we got a plan to fix it, RFC
>      patch is on the way.
>
>
> This patch set was tested on FVP by Fuwei, and booted ok as expected.
> (No functional change since last version)

For what it's worth, I applied these to the latest 3.19-rc4 kernel
and booted that on an APM X-Gene and on pre-release AMD hardware.
I then ran a couple of stress tests such as kernel compiles and
filesystem stressers on the systems.

I posted my tested-bys to the individual patches but Al Stone
recommended I say how the testing was done.

--Mark Langsdorf