Re: [PATCH v6 00/14] ACPI NUMA support for ARM64

[David Daney]

On 05/11/2016 01:35 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 12:40 PM, Will Deacon <will.deacon@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 02:43:11AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 8:07 PM, David Daney <ddaney.cavm@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > From: David Daney <david.daney@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > >
> > > > Based on git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/arm64/linux.git
> > > > for-next/core branch at commit 643d703d2d2d ("arm64: compat: Check for
> > > > AArch32 state")
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > > > David Daney (2):
> > > >    arm64, numa: Cleanup NUMA disabled messages.
> > > >    acpi, numa, srat: Improve SRAT error detection and add messages.
> > > >
> > > > Hanjun Guo (11):
> > > >    acpi, numa: Use pr_fmt() instead of printk
> > > >    acpi, numa: Replace ACPI_DEBUG_PRINT() with pr_debug()
> > > >    acpi, numa: remove duplicate NULL check
> > > >    acpi, numa: move acpi_numa_slit_init() to drivers/acpi/numa.c
> > > >    arm64, numa: rework numa_add_memblk()
> > > >    x86, acpi, numa: cleanup acpi_numa_processor_affinity_init()
> > > >    acpi, numa: move bad_srat() and srat_disabled() to
> > > >      drivers/acpi/numa.c
> > > >    acpi, numa: remove unneeded acpi_numa=1
> > > >    acpi, numa: Move acpi_numa_memory_affinity_init() to
> > > >      drivers/acpi/numa.c
> > > >    arm64, acpi, numa: NUMA support based on SRAT and SLIT
> > > >    acpi, numa: Enable ACPI based NUMA on ARM64
> > > >
> > > > Robert Richter (1):
> > > >    acpi, numa: Move acpi_numa_arch_fixup() to ia64 only
> > >
> > > I need ACKs from the ARM64 maintainers on patches [6-7/13] and [13-14/14].
> >
> > There's also a dependency on the arm64 for-next/core branch, so I've been
> > largely ignoring this as far as 4.6 is concerned and was planning to take
> > a proper look for 4.7 once the upcoming merge window is out of the way.
>
> That would be 4.7 and 4.8 respectively I suppose?
>
> Anyway, Catalin has ACKed all of them except for the [13/14], so
> technically I can apply [1-12/14] now and then [13-14/14] can be
> applied when they are ready.
>
> Do you think there will be any problems with merging [6-7/14] into 4.7
> via the ACPI tree?

I would defer to the arm64 maintainers for decisions about the arm64 
specific parts of the patch set.  That said, many of the arm64 specific 
patches depend on the arm64 for-next/core branch, so you would have to 
be careful about merge ordering if you pull these in before the 
for-next/core branch is merged.

Also FWIW, I plan on addressing Catalin's comments about 13/14 and 
posting a new version of the patch set in the next day or two.

Thanks for looking at these,
David Daney