Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 14 Mar 2023 20:10:27 -0700 (PDT) | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/3] kernel/reboot: Use the static sys-off handler for any priority | From | Palmer Dabbelt <> |
| |
On Sat, 18 Feb 2023 15:32:06 PST (-0800), dmitry.osipenko@collabora.com wrote: > On 2/19/23 02:20, Samuel Holland wrote: >> On 2/14/23 18:17, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: > ... >>> Sorry for being slow here, I'd been assuming someone would Ack this but >>> it looks like maybe there's nobody in the maintainers file for >>> kernel/reboot.c? I'm fine taking this via the RISC-V tree if that's OK >>> with people, but the cover letter suggests the patch is necessary for >>> multiple patch sets. >> >> See also Dmitry's reply[0] to the PSCI thread. (Maybe I should have sent >> both conversions as one series?) >> >> I am happy with the patches going through any tree. The kernel/reboot.c >> patch is exactly the same between the two series, so it should not hurt >> if it gets merged twice. Though if you take this series through the >> RISC-V tree, maybe you want to create a tag for it? >> >> I am not sure exactly what needs to be done here; I am happy to do >> anything that would assist getting both series merged for v6.3, to avoid >> a regression with axp20x[1]. >> >> Regards, >> Samuel >> >> [0]: >> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/0a180849-ba1b-2a82-ab06-ed1b8155d5ca@collabora.com/ >> [1]: >> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/e38d29f5-cd3c-4a2b-b355-2bcfad00a24b@sholland.org/ > > The reboot.c changes should be acked/applied by Rafael. > I noticed that you haven't CC'd the linux-pm ML, maybe that's why it > hasn't got the attention.
OK, I'm adding them here. Not sure if we're ment to re-send it to the list, no rush on my end I'm just scrubbing through some old stuff on patchwork again.
| |