The following changes since commit d683b96b072dc4680fc74964eca77e6a23d1fa6e:
Linux 3.10-rc4 (2013-06-02 17:11:17 +0900)
are available in the git repository at:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/ras/ras.git tags/please-pull-einj
for you to fetch changes up to ace3647afb3eca214f6da5d653ad116ff77545b6:
ACPI/APEI: Update einj documentation for param1/param2 (2013-06-06 15:28:11 -0700)
----------------------------------------------------------------
Miscellaneous fixes for ACPI EINJ (error injection) code.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Chen Gong (2):
ACPI/APEI: Add parameter check before error injection
ACPI/APEI: Update einj documentation for param1/param2
Wei Yongjun (1):
ACPI, APEI, EINJ: Fix error return code in einj_init()
Documentation/acpi/apei/einj.txt | 9 +++++++--
drivers/acpi/apei/einj.c | 39 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
kernel/resource.c | 1 +
3 files changed, 44 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
* Luck, Tony <[email protected]> wrote:
> The following changes since commit d683b96b072dc4680fc74964eca77e6a23d1fa6e:
>
> Linux 3.10-rc4 (2013-06-02 17:11:17 +0900)
>
> are available in the git repository at:
>
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/ras/ras.git tags/please-pull-einj
>
> for you to fetch changes up to ace3647afb3eca214f6da5d653ad116ff77545b6:
>
> ACPI/APEI: Update einj documentation for param1/param2 (2013-06-06 15:28:11 -0700)
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> Miscellaneous fixes for ACPI EINJ (error injection) code.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> Chen Gong (2):
> ACPI/APEI: Add parameter check before error injection
> ACPI/APEI: Update einj documentation for param1/param2
>
> Wei Yongjun (1):
> ACPI, APEI, EINJ: Fix error return code in einj_init()
>
> Documentation/acpi/apei/einj.txt | 9 +++++++--
> drivers/acpi/apei/einj.c | 39 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
> kernel/resource.c | 1 +
> 3 files changed, 44 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
Pulled, thanks Tony!
Len, are you fine with this route [tip:x86/ras tree] for the
drivers/acpi/apei/einj.c changes?
Thanks,
Ingo
+rafael
> Pulled, thanks Tony!
>
> Len, are you fine with this route [tip:x86/ras tree] for the
> drivers/acpi/apei/einj.c changes?
Yes, the RAS guys basically own that code.
thanks,
-Len
>> Pulled, thanks Tony!
>>
>> Len, are you fine with this route [tip:x86/ras tree] for the
>> drivers/acpi/apei/einj.c changes?
>
> Yes, the RAS guys basically own that code.
These patches also got picked up by Rafael and are in his ACPI tree
too. I think the patches were applied identically, so there should not
be any merge conflicts when this all comes back together in the 3.11
merge window.
Rafael already had a chat about who will take future apei changes
so that we won't have this happen again.
-Tony
> >> Pulled, thanks Tony!
> >>
> >> Len, are you fine with this route [tip:x86/ras tree] for the
> >> drivers/acpi/apei/einj.c changes?
> >
> > Yes, the RAS guys basically own that code.
>
> These patches also got picked up by Rafael and are in his ACPI tree
> too. I think the patches were applied identically, so there should not
> be any merge conflicts when this all comes back together in the 3.11
> merge window.
>
> Rafael already had a chat about who will take future apei changes
> so that we won't have this happen again.
I think the only real problem with being in two places at once
is if the patches _change_. When that happens, you need to
get them _both_ changed, else merge conflict happens at the worst time.
-L
On Wednesday, June 19, 2013 05:01:52 PM Brown, Len wrote:
> > >> Pulled, thanks Tony!
> > >>
> > >> Len, are you fine with this route [tip:x86/ras tree] for the
> > >> drivers/acpi/apei/einj.c changes?
> > >
> > > Yes, the RAS guys basically own that code.
> >
> > These patches also got picked up by Rafael and are in his ACPI tree
> > too. I think the patches were applied identically, so there should not
> > be any merge conflicts when this all comes back together in the 3.11
> > merge window.
> >
> > Rafael already had a chat about who will take future apei changes
> > so that we won't have this happen again.
>
> I think the only real problem with being in two places at once
> is if the patches _change_. When that happens, you need to
> get them _both_ changed, else merge conflict happens at the worst time.
I dropped the APEI patches from my tree.
Thanks,
Rafael
--
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.