Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756159AbcCUOFV (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Mar 2016 10:05:21 -0400 Received: from mail-wm0-f52.google.com ([74.125.82.52]:33438 "EHLO mail-wm0-f52.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755429AbcCUOFQ (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Mar 2016 10:05:16 -0400 Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2016 14:05:12 +0000 From: Matt Fleming To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Chen Yu , ACPI Devel Maling List , "linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" , linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List , x86@kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , Len Brown Subject: Re: [PATCH][v5] ACPI / PM: Introduce efi poweroff for HW-full platforms without _S5 Message-ID: <20160321140512.GA11676@codeblueprint.co.uk> References: <1458484268-18311-1-git-send-email-yu.c.chen@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24+41 (02bc14ed1569) (2015-08-30) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 484 Lines: 14 On Mon, 21 Mar, at 01:43:18PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > OK, this is fine by me. > > Matt, what do you think? If possible I'd like to see some mention in the commit message of future Intel Base-IA platforms requiring this support, so when someone asks me in the future (and I've forgotten the answer) "Why was this patch get merged?" I can point to the commit log. But other than that, yeah, this looks good to me. Thanks! Reviewed-by: Matt Fleming