Re: [PATCH V5 1/4] ACPI: Support Generic Initiator only domains

[Jonathan Cameron]

On Thu, 7 Nov 2019 15:54:28 +0100
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Friday, October 18, 2019 2:46:56 PM CET Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> > On Fri, 18 Oct 2019 12:18:33 +0200
> > "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >   
> > > On Friday, October 4, 2019 1:43:27 PM CEST Jonathan Cameron wrote:  
> > > > Generic Initiators are a new ACPI concept that allows for the
> > > > description of proximity domains that contain a device which
> > > > performs memory access (such as a network card) but neither
> > > > host CPU nor Memory.
> > > > 
> > > > This patch has the parsing code and provides the infrastructure
> > > > for an architecture to associate these new domains with their
> > > > nearest memory processing node.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@xxxxxxxxxx>    
> > > 
> > > This depends on the series from Dan at:
> > > 
> > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-acpi/CAPcyv4gBSX58CWH4HZ28w0_cZRzJrhgdEFHa2g8KDqyv8aFqZQ@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/T/#m1acce3ae8f29f680c0d95fd1e840e703949fbc48
> > >   
> > Hi Rafael,
> > 
> > Yes. Cover letter mentions it was rebased on v4 of that series.
> >   
> > > AFAICS, so please respin when that one hits the Linus' tree.  
> > 
> > Sure, though that pushes it out another cycle and it's beginning to
> > get a bit silly (just rebases since April).
> > 
> > I guess it can't be helped given the series hits several trees.  
> 
> I've just applied the Dan's series and I can take patch [1/4] from this one,
> but for the [2-3/4] I'd like to get some ACKs from the arm64 and x86 people
> respectively.

Thanks Rafael!

Absolutely understood on the need for Acks.

For ARM let us try a few more CCs

+CC Will, Lorenzo, Hanjun.

Also Ingo on basis of showing a passing interest in the x86 patch
previously.  Otherwise I think we have the x86 people most like to
comment already cc'd.

https://patchwork.kernel.org/cover/11174247/ has the full series.

I'd appreciate anyone who has time taking a look at these.  The
actual actions in the architectures are very simple, but I may well
be missing some subtlety.

> 
> Thanks!
> 
Thanks,

Jonathan