Re: [GIT PULL] RAS for 4.2

On Monday, May 04, 2015 04:02:16 PM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Monday, May 04, 2015 03:16:09 PM Borislav Petkov wrote: > > On Mon, May 04, 2015 at 03:36:16PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > I'd like to pick this one up if that's not a problem. > > > > > > Traditionally, things like this h

Re: [GIT PULL] RAS for 4.2

On Monday, May 04, 2015 03:16:09 PM Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Mon, May 04, 2015 at 03:36:16PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > I'd like to pick this one up if that's not a problem. > > > > Traditionally, things like this have gone in through the Tony's tree, but if > > that's not the case any

Re: [GIT PULL] RAS for 4.2

On Mon, May 04, 2015 at 03:36:16PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > I'd like to pick this one up if that's not a problem. > > Traditionally, things like this have gone in through the Tony's tree, but if > that's not the case any more, I think ACPI is the next best upstream for it. It is Tony's t

Re: [GIT PULL] RAS for 4.2

On Monday, May 04, 2015 11:33:47 AM Borislav Petkov wrote: > Hi Ingo, > > please queue for 4.2. > > Thanks. > > @Len, @Rafael: Guys, I'm sending this through tip even though strictly > speaking it is ACPI. > > I also am guessing to the point of being almost right, though, that > you're secretly

[GIT PULL] RAS for 4.2

Hi Ingo, please queue for 4.2. Thanks. @Len, @Rafael: Guys, I'm sending this through tip even though strictly speaking it is ACPI. I also am guessing to the point of being almost right, though, that you're secretly happy I'm doing that because it is one less issue you have to deal with. :-) :-)