From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752089AbaJSWPW (ORCPT ); Sun, 19 Oct 2014 18:15:22 -0400 Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:43432 "EHLO mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751747AbaJSWPS (ORCPT ); Sun, 19 Oct 2014 18:15:18 -0400 Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2014 06:14:12 +0800 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , Grant Likely , Arnd Bergmann , Mika Westerberg , ACPI Devel Maling List , Aaron Lu , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Linus Walleij , Alexandre Courbot , Dmitry Torokhov , Bryan Wu , Darren Hart , Mark Rutland Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 00/12] Add ACPI _DSD and unified device properties support Message-ID: <20141019221412.GA7387@kroah.com> References: <2660541.BycO7TFnA2@vostro.rjw.lan> <11223831.j9KAEfSQsY@vostro.rjw.lan> <20141017154007.GB29643@kroah.com> <1787777.qrmnDZUWyu@vostro.rjw.lan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1787777.qrmnDZUWyu@vostro.rjw.lan> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 11:49:45PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Friday, October 17, 2014 05:40:07 PM Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 02:01:33PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > Hi Everyone, > > > > > > Hving had a couple of chats with Grant and Arnd during LinuxCon EU/LPC, we > > > now have version 5 taking all feedback into account (hopefully). > > > > > > Changes have been made to patch [02/12] and to patches [09-12/12], although > > > in patches [10-12/12] they are fairly minor. I have retained the Greg's > > > ACK on patch [02/12], because it is essentially the same that have been > > > posted aleady and ACKed by him (Greg, please let me know if I shouldn't > > > do that) and all the ACKs on the remaining patches except for patch [09/12] > > > which is substantially different. Still, if reviewers think that their > > > ACKs don't apply any more, please let me know and I'll remove them. > > > > No objection from me to keep my ACK on those patches, thanks for asking. > > Well, that's just fair IMO. :-) > > Does [09/12] look good too in particular? Yes, I have no objections to it.