Re: state of some x86 acpi patches

[Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>]

Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> Yinghai Lu wrote:
>> Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
>>  
>>> Ingo Molnar wrote:
>>>    
>>>> yes, that end result is the desired state of things. We did run with
>>>> this for several months and resolved all the cases that needed fixing,
>>>> but dropped them when the ACPI tree moved out from under us.
>>>>
>>>> Can resurrect it if Len feels OK about the concept. Len, you shouldnt
>>>> worry about conflicts - we can do it after the ACPI changes of this
>>>> merge window are upstream so there should be no conflict trouble at
>>>> all. How does that sound?
>>>>         
>>> Doesn't look like these changes made it in this time.  Did they get
>>> overlooked, or did some other problem come up?  Or did you want me to
>>> dig them up?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>    J
>>>     
>>
>>
>> please check attached that are updated to today tip/master with ingo's
>> genapic patchset..
>>   
> 
> The look OK, but they didn't get merged into tip/master?
> 
Ingo is too busy...
It seems Len already agreed those patches can go through tip.

Ingo?

YH