From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752461AbbAPHSH (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Jan 2015 02:18:07 -0500 Received: from mail-pd0-f173.google.com ([209.85.192.173]:64400 "EHLO mail-pd0-f173.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751569AbbAPHSF (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Jan 2015 02:18:05 -0500 Message-ID: <54B8BB24.2020408@linaro.org> Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2015 15:17:56 +0800 From: Hanjun Guo User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Catalin Marinas , Grant Likely CC: Will Deacon , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Olof Johansson , Arnd Bergmann , Mark Rutland , Lorenzo Pieralisi , "graeme.gregory@linaro.org" , Sudeep Holla , "jcm@redhat.com" , Jason Cooper , Marc Zyngier , Bjorn Helgaas , Mark Brown , Rob Herring , Robert Richter , Randy Dunlap , Charles Garcia-Tobin , "phoenix.liyi@huawei.com" , Timur Tabi , "suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com" , Yijing Wang , ACPI Devel Mailing List , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linaro-acpi Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 00/17] Introduce ACPI for ARM64 based on ACPI 5.1 References: <1421247905-3749-1-git-send-email-hanjun.guo@linaro.org> <20150115182346.GE2329@e104818-lin.cambridge.arm.com> In-Reply-To: <20150115182346.GE2329@e104818-lin.cambridge.arm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2015年01月16日 02:23, Catalin Marinas wrote: > Hi Grant, > > On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 04:26:20PM +0000, Grant Likely wrote: >> On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 3:04 PM, Hanjun Guo wrote: >>> This is the v7 of ACPI core patches for ARM64 based on ACPI 5.1 >> >> I'll get right to the point: Can we please have this series queued up >> for v3.20? > > Before you even ask for this, please look at the patches and realise > that there is a complete lack of Reviewed-by tags on the code (well, > apart from trivial Kconfig changes). In addition, the series touches on > other subsystems like clocksource, irqchip, acpi and I don't see any > acks from the corresponding maintainers. So even if I wanted to merge For the ACPI part, Rafael already said that "Having looked at the patches recently, I don't see any major problems in them from the ACPI core perspective, so to me they are good to go." [1] Is that kind of ack for this ? Thanks Hanjun [1]: http://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1409.1/03363.html