From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from canpmsgout09.his.huawei.com (canpmsgout09.his.huawei.com [113.46.200.224]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7970031A061; Fri, 20 Mar 2026 09:28:55 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=113.46.200.224 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1773998937; cv=none; b=aHv5zoKhsfSqYiLNN9zB1f2FLkDLMy9HJ1hS12GqRdTioNnbjSaOyDLSIVUKQsbN/M5RNe5P+b1gZeEGMAWFg7FnfqGwWKcO9apwdw7VxRzAz2FF0a/cbbDXNstoI6ZeE8/g0i46HCsa0MwQJViQE2fhaaLnwHyhQXcbv3/y2ys= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1773998937; c=relaxed/simple; bh=dTAvufztQKo3Sa181iPB+4E1k6ZRfEDVnRafQ/wm0Pc=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:CC:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=eLB4UC33L8Q9gc/K5OwQ03jLwL3YbAxdUy0VMkSZKsHqzDfIcSNArweM8piyGqIvAxfjn1xyGBkBMIsdkdu3QqVYT+JMI0U92jYmZNw7yTJXPQATQcXzDFlgJbdebA+cxyO1EHdu12QX1810teoJQHxp0lo9kFQEHCTwHMxbBH8= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=huawei.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=huawei.com header.i=@huawei.com header.b=a/UyDyL2; arc=none smtp.client-ip=113.46.200.224 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=huawei.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=huawei.com header.i=@huawei.com header.b="a/UyDyL2" dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=huawei.com; s=dkim; c=relaxed/relaxed; q=dns/txt; h=From; bh=HlNFJC4wyGaCNDbE98fPlMM3Ufwe5S0+cI7tu1uEJCg=; b=a/UyDyL2Bn1j0uSZRF35r+WgLIIXko5euO/MgsRomtz7PkvhYcAMpRt4RpMou2R1cLGVef72P oLDoUjzWHxESBFel09sC55R6dI9nXOhtB6I3mYne0VRi0BxIm+V9XsV38zbGSfcc/muuQk5lZZa E+o+F7TA36OMVKh6hngXzgE= Received: from mail.maildlp.com (unknown [172.19.163.214]) by canpmsgout09.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTPS id 4fccY15r6kz1cyV1; Fri, 20 Mar 2026 17:22:45 +0800 (CST) Received: from dggpemf500011.china.huawei.com (unknown [7.185.36.131]) by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 81A404056C; Fri, 20 Mar 2026 17:28:47 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.67.109.254] (10.67.109.254) by dggpemf500011.china.huawei.com (7.185.36.131) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.1544.11; Fri, 20 Mar 2026 17:28:44 +0800 Message-ID: <181ef8b3-dadb-bbc1-7779-a875ac7bef05@huawei.com> Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2026 17:28:43 +0800 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.2.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH v13 RESEND 00/14] arm64: entry: Convert to Generic Entry Content-Language: en-US To: Linus Walleij CC: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , References: <20260317082020.737779-1-ruanjinjie@huawei.com> From: Jinjie Ruan In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-ClientProxiedBy: kwepems500002.china.huawei.com (7.221.188.17) To dggpemf500011.china.huawei.com (7.185.36.131) On 2026/3/19 22:35, Linus Walleij wrote: > On Tue, Mar 17, 2026 at 9:20 AM Jinjie Ruan wrote: > >> Currently, x86, Riscv, Loongarch use the Generic Entry which makes >> maintainers' work easier and codes more elegant. arm64 has already >> successfully switched to the Generic IRQ Entry in commit >> b3cf07851b6c ("arm64: entry: Switch to generic IRQ entry"), it is >> time to completely convert arm64 to Generic Entry. > > Looks good to me, except patch 14 that needs your Signoff. > > Perhaps it is best if patches 1 thru 11 are applied separately > to the arm64 tree and the remaining patches either postponed > to the next kernel cycle or applied on top of an immutable branch > based off v7.0-rc1 from the arm64 tree? Thanks for the review and the suggestion on the merge strategy. 1. Regarding the Split: I agree with applying Patches 1-10 to the arm64 tree first. These are foundational and ready for inclusion. 2. Regarding Patches 11-14: I am fine with postponing them or using an immutable branch based on v7.0-rc1. > > Yours, > Linus Walleij >