From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752200Ab3BTXja (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Feb 2013 18:39:30 -0500 Received: from terminus.zytor.com ([198.137.202.10]:60104 "EHLO mail.zytor.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751457Ab3BTXj3 (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Feb 2013 18:39:29 -0500 Message-ID: <51255E57.2010803@zytor.com> Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2013 15:37:59 -0800 From: "H. Peter Anvin" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130110 Thunderbird/17.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Russell King - ARM Linux CC: Alessandro Rubini , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, giancarlo.asnaghi@st.com, ciminaghi@gnudd.com, alan@linux.intel.com, tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, x86@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH V5 4/5] drivers/amba: add support for a PCI bridge References: <51254F57.7060603@zytor.com> <52b9f4e1cc04b7c656e10ee16020090601f6f537.1361393832.git.rubini@gnudd.com> <20130220222419.GX17833@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20130220224528.GA24819@mail.gnudd.com> <51255329.4070506@zytor.com> <20130220233532.GY17833@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> In-Reply-To: <20130220233532.GY17833@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 02/20/2013 03:35 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 02:50:17PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote: >> On 02/20/2013 02:45 PM, Alessandro Rubini wrote: >>> [meanwhile I posted V6 with the acked-by of linusw and others, that >>> were missing in V5] >>> >>> rmk: >>>>> I'm happy to take it through my tree if everyone is now happy with this. >>> >>> hpa: >>>> I am okay with that, although I would like to make sure we do a bunch of >>>> x86 randconfigs on it before pushing it to Linus. >>> >>> I did like this: >>> - disable STA2X11 (and thus AMBA) and build >>> - enable STA2X11, answer y to all new questions and build >>> >>> So there's nothing left (you'll have two unrelated warnings, that I'm >>> working on and I'll post a fix tomorrow). Sure, Peter, first time I >>> didn't do that test and missed some of the drivers. >>> >> >> I was just concerned that rmk wouldn't necessarily do those tests as a >> matter of process. >> >> So Russell -- how do you want to handle this? Should I take them (and >> ask Ingo to put them through his test machinery) or do you want to (and >> run x86 randconfigs as part of your testing)? > > Well, I'm happy to take the non-x86 bits if that's what others want (for > the _next_ merge window, not this one.) That _should_ result in x86 not > seeing this stuff until it gets the ARM_AMBA definition enabled, and > giving it a full cycle of testing. > > However, if we want to keep the patch set together and route it via > another tree, I'm also fine with that too. > Actually, between linux-next and Fengguang's zeroday testbot I suspect we'll get all the coverage we need. So yes, go ahead and take them. Acked-by: H. Peter Anvin -hpa