From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B58AFC4743D for ; Tue, 8 Jun 2021 18:14:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93B1861376 for ; Tue, 8 Jun 2021 18:14:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231517AbhFHSQF (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Jun 2021 14:16:05 -0400 Received: from mail-pj1-f45.google.com ([209.85.216.45]:56246 "EHLO mail-pj1-f45.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231652AbhFHSQE (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Jun 2021 14:16:04 -0400 Received: by mail-pj1-f45.google.com with SMTP id k7so12395720pjf.5 for ; Tue, 08 Jun 2021 11:14:11 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=intel-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=iT+9YBrKWyvo8mgRDDIbA4IQmgaCVWxrYlNqzLFn14A=; b=XWFQqNL+YQzcDYg1eQjRy6ODMPIoqWVBIFfosXpwaZRK8MhvQFGnjWBjRt9BfvCENn UyQKBb7O47B0Wtw6yaP5RkPmGchKOQJu+qQJYc1HuTJKFudJATDVdbgxorEsWiH/Ofl4 r6YB8ZEYXw1G11/Jc2RJRizUtOBc0t/FNMJ3ijlhGgkM4J7CjkcbWn8lkQYoUVDOn0ot soaNpink9zJyMQXb+aRH28J+IuzobcdbMVK8SHNAFTU2J1GyK3Ku2cgGBCJr/gWFfBs4 aB8hA4KJxXCWwgPMgPMF6LffeRGXEuOo71mwmURkSr2MAZErRvvFugEt7O5PSn+3yS3q z56Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=iT+9YBrKWyvo8mgRDDIbA4IQmgaCVWxrYlNqzLFn14A=; b=MUADbrLMJcSKmLpT4rC+Xi6nvQ4rV9uLyfS57lWvMaXo4zTNe2o7467CGjj/waSSYE CL53u4HzyyC0Ks0UpCyBOhC9rDty5MY0ZoLZQvfj8l6fcO+sUbENdq6JOyCI1007U8q+ KKU7m7y855KNWnxPUVOfb70pHF/fYR6Vz+Lk93NbDj6Cz8H4eJPxfxLvNF7Q4uVoqVAw 4rUkh2BkHmvCdOoniN+SPFW1Ubj1tNmyH8d6rNI0kDJzHCazFc5SLmSMNKAlilwFqmI2 qaW9O7TdYDADvMMhYWqoG5bIjr74bRDVwzzZWt3vdQNz3LDK8vqVZh1buwfIUku/3Edg OItw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532sQRa5qeNPt6/U3vKRZYEXfqSiH8+s1xC061KC6FJpLaeisHWj n/nloFlB57VW8FKxiVtz3GDyKnOZXyhXv7/Vqqjw3g== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwr+hP9MAmrFS5OZIs04DD3i9Ns4fWBZ3I0XpBW1UqqYivJHBEfXlqvob2ZNgEaHfcPgCXk6tWZMi96ZuF6cwI= X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:ea8c:: with SMTP id h12mr4282256pjz.149.1623175991178; Tue, 08 Jun 2021 11:13:11 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <162295949351.1109360.10329014558746500142.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com> <162295949886.1109360.17423894188288323907.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com> In-Reply-To: From: Dan Williams Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2021 11:13:00 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/6] cxl/acpi: Local definition of ACPICA infrastructure To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org, "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Alison Schofield , Erik Kaneda , Linux PCI , ACPI Devel Maling List Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jun 7, 2021 at 10:03 AM Dan Williams wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 7, 2021 at 5:26 AM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > > On Sun, Jun 6, 2021 at 8:05 AM Dan Williams wrote: > > > > > > The recently released CXL specification change (ECN) for the CXL Fixed > > > Memory Window Structure (CFMWS) extension to the CXL Early Discovery > > > Table (CEDT) enables a large amount of functionality. It defines the > > > root of a CXL memory topology and is needed for all OS flows for CXL > > > provisioning CXL memory expanders. For ease of merging and tree > > > management add the new ACPI definition locally (drivers/cxl/acpi.h) in > > > such a way that they will not collide with the eventual arrival of the > > > definitions through the ACPICA project to their final location > > > (drivers/acpi/actbl1.h). > > > > I've just applied the ACPICA series including this change which can be > > made available as a forward-only branch in my tree, if that helps. > > Yes, please, that would be my preference. When I created this patch > the concern was that a stable branch was possibly weeks away. Rafael, I see "4a2c1dcfaf59 ACPICA: Add the CFMWS structure definition to the CEDT table" in your tree, I can safely assume that commit will not rebase at this point? I'll likely rewind your acpica branch to that point and merge there to avoid carrying any unrelated follow-on commits.