On Sun, Dec 31, 2017 at 12:10:51AM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:Should send to like this ? Because I add patch for Aspeed chip:
On Fri, Dec 29, 2017 at 2:53 AM, Haiyue WangMore generally:
<haiyue.wang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
When PCH works under eSPI mode, the PMC (Power Management Controller) inI have not looked at the driver contents yet, but I'm adding the SPI
PCH is waiting for SUS_ACK from BMC after it alerts SUS_WARN. It is in
dead loop if no SUS_ACK assert. This is the basic requirement for the BMC
works as eSPI slave.
Also for the host power on / off actions, from BMC side, the following VW
(Virtual Wire) messages are done in firmware:
1. SLAVE_BOOT_LOAD_DONE / SLAVE_BOOT_LOAD_STATUS
2. SUS_ACK
3. OOB_RESET_ACK
4. HOST_RESET_ACK
maintainer and
mailing list to Cc here for further discussion. Can you clarify how
As documented in SubmittingPatches please send patches to the
maintainers for the code you would like to change. The normal kernel
workflow is that people apply patches from their inboxes, if they aren't
copied they are likely to not see the patch at all and it is much more
difficult to apply patches.