From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pa0-f48.google.com (mail-pa0-f48.google.com [209.85.220.48]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3AD6F6B0038 for ; Thu, 3 Dec 2015 05:18:28 -0500 (EST) Received: by pacdm15 with SMTP id dm15so66627052pac.3 for ; Thu, 03 Dec 2015 02:18:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from foss.arm.com (foss.arm.com. [217.140.101.70]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id rn8si11162880pab.174.2015.12.03.02.18.27 for ; Thu, 03 Dec 2015 02:18:27 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2015 10:18:24 +0000 From: Will Deacon Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 00/13] UEFI boot and runtime services support for 32-bit ARM Message-ID: <20151203101823.GA11337@arm.com> References: <1448886507-3216-1-git-send-email-ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1448886507-3216-1-git-send-email-ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Ard Biesheuvel Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, catalin.marinas@arm.com, mark.rutland@arm.com, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, leif.lindholm@linaro.org, matt@codeblueprint.co.uk, linux@arm.linux.org.uk, akpm@linux-foundation.org, kuleshovmail@gmail.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, ryan.harkin@linaro.org, grant.likely@linaro.org, roy.franz@linaro.org, msalter@redhat.com Hi Ard, On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 01:28:14PM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > This series adds support for booting the 32-bit ARM kernel directly from > UEFI firmware using a builtin UEFI stub. It mostly reuses refactored arm64 > code, and the differences (primarily the PE/COFF header and entry point and > the efi_create_mapping() implementation) are split out into arm64 and ARM > versions. > > Since I did not receive any further comments in reply to v3 from the people who > commented on v2, I think this series in now in sufficient shape to be pulled. > Note that patch #1 touches mm/memblock.c and include/linux/memblock.h, for which > get_maintainer.pl does not provide a maintainer, so it has been cc'ed to various > past editors of those files, and to the linux-mm mailing list. > > Since the series affects both arm64 and ARM, it is up to the maintainers to let > me know how and when they wish to proceed with this. My suggestion would be to > send out pull request for patches #1 - #5 to the arm64 maintainer, and for the > whole series to the ARM maintainer. This should keep any conflicts on either > side confined to the respective maintainer tree, rather then propagating all the > way to -next. For the arm64 bits (patches 2-5): Acked-by: Will Deacon I'd really like an ack from the mm crowd on patch 1 before I queue it. Will -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org