From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Subject: Re: [Patch v3] 0/7] Remove mach-kirkwood Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2014 01:46:36 +0200 Message-ID: <21386976.Th3DhM7uPl@vostro.rjw.lan> References: <1409417172-6846-1-git-send-email-andrew@lunn.ch> <1997148.5Fa3W8ZmXx@vostro.rjw.lan> <20140901140320.GE11312@lunn.ch> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20140901140320.GE11312@lunn.ch> Sender: linux-pm-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Andrew Lunn Cc: Jason Cooper , linux ARM , Daniel Lezcano , linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, Tejun Heo , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, Zhang Rui , Richard Purdie , linux-leds@vger.kernel.org, Alessandro Zummo , rtc-linux@googlegroups.com, Wim Van Sebroeck , linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org, Viresh Kumar List-Id: linux-leds@vger.kernel.org On Monday, September 01, 2014 04:03:20 PM Andrew Lunn wrote: > On Mon, Sep 01, 2014 at 03:56:43PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Saturday, August 30, 2014 06:46:05 PM Andrew Lunn wrote: > > > This is mostly a resend of these patches, removing mach-kirkwood. Not > > > all maintainers picked up there patches, which has resulted in some > > > dead kernel configuration in v3.17-rcX. > > > > > > The patch set has been rebased on v3.17-rc2, and it is intended that > > > Jason Cooper will submit them for inclusion in an RC. Subsystem > > > maintainers do not need to do anything. > > > > > > The last patch "cpufreq: Remove ARCH_KIRKWOOD dependency" is new, > > > since what it is removing was added during v3.16-rcX. It follows the > > > pattern of all the other patches. > > > > > > Andrew Lunn (7): > > > cpuidle: kirkwood: Remove ARCH_KIRKWOOD dependency > > > ata: Remove ARCH_KIRKWOOD dependency > > > thermal: Remove ARCH_KIRKWOOD dependency > > > leds: Remove ARCH_KIRKWOOD dependency > > > rtc: Remove ARCH_KIRKWOOD dependency > > > watchdog: Remove ARCH_KIRKWOOD dependency > > > cpufreq: Remove ARCH_KIRKWOOD dependency > > > > I have no problems with these changes, but what exactly am I supposed to do? > > Jason will submit the whole series. So an Acked-by: would be nice. OK, so please regard the cpuidle and cpufreq patches as ACKed. Rafael From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: rjw@rjwysocki.net (Rafael J. Wysocki) Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2014 01:46:36 +0200 Subject: [Patch v3] 0/7] Remove mach-kirkwood In-Reply-To: <20140901140320.GE11312@lunn.ch> References: <1409417172-6846-1-git-send-email-andrew@lunn.ch> <1997148.5Fa3W8ZmXx@vostro.rjw.lan> <20140901140320.GE11312@lunn.ch> Message-ID: <21386976.Th3DhM7uPl@vostro.rjw.lan> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Monday, September 01, 2014 04:03:20 PM Andrew Lunn wrote: > On Mon, Sep 01, 2014 at 03:56:43PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Saturday, August 30, 2014 06:46:05 PM Andrew Lunn wrote: > > > This is mostly a resend of these patches, removing mach-kirkwood. Not > > > all maintainers picked up there patches, which has resulted in some > > > dead kernel configuration in v3.17-rcX. > > > > > > The patch set has been rebased on v3.17-rc2, and it is intended that > > > Jason Cooper will submit them for inclusion in an RC. Subsystem > > > maintainers do not need to do anything. > > > > > > The last patch "cpufreq: Remove ARCH_KIRKWOOD dependency" is new, > > > since what it is removing was added during v3.16-rcX. It follows the > > > pattern of all the other patches. > > > > > > Andrew Lunn (7): > > > cpuidle: kirkwood: Remove ARCH_KIRKWOOD dependency > > > ata: Remove ARCH_KIRKWOOD dependency > > > thermal: Remove ARCH_KIRKWOOD dependency > > > leds: Remove ARCH_KIRKWOOD dependency > > > rtc: Remove ARCH_KIRKWOOD dependency > > > watchdog: Remove ARCH_KIRKWOOD dependency > > > cpufreq: Remove ARCH_KIRKWOOD dependency > > > > I have no problems with these changes, but what exactly am I supposed to do? > > Jason will submit the whole series. So an Acked-by: would be nice. OK, so please regard the cpuidle and cpufreq patches as ACKed. Rafael