On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 04:27:07PM +0100, Matt Fleming wrote:
> > I'm wondering if it would be better to organize it into a separate topic
> > branch. We can still take it through tip, if you want, but it would be
> > better than putting it all into one tree.
>
> Sure, that makes sense. I'll do
On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 03:47:13PM +0100, Matt Fleming wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Apr, at 02:47:28PM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > Given that Leif's series contains both generic efi and arm64 patches,
> > what's your preference for merging them? I'm happy to add my ack and
> > they go via your tree (or the
On Tue, 29 Apr, at 07:56:20AM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>
> I'm wondering if it would be better to organize it into a separate topic
> branch. We can still take it through tip, if you want, but it would be
> better than putting it all into one tree.
Sure, that makes sense. I'll do that.
--
Matt
On 04/29/2014 07:47 AM, Matt Fleming wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Apr, at 02:47:28PM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
>>
>> Waiting for the tip/x86/efi to be merged first is not a problem. We
>> also need a stable base for testing the arm64 UEFI series, so I assume
>> this series can be based onto tip/x86/efi
On Tue, 29 Apr, at 02:47:28PM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
>
> Waiting for the tip/x86/efi to be merged first is not a problem. We
> also need a stable base for testing the arm64 UEFI series, so I assume
> this series can be based onto tip/x86/efi (would such branch be rebased
> before hitting
On 04/29/2014 06:47 AM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
>
> Waiting for the tip/x86/efi to be merged first is not a problem. We
> also need a stable base for testing the arm64 UEFI series, so I assume
> this series can be based onto tip/x86/efi (would such branch be rebased
> before hitting mainline?).
>
On 04/29/2014 04:43 AM, Matt Fleming wrote:
> (Pulling in Peter and Stephen)
>
> On Tue, 29 Apr, at 11:28:17AM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
>>
>> The patches look fine to me, they've been through several rounds of
>> review already. How do we propose these get merged as the series
>> contains both
On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 12:43:56PM +0100, Matt Fleming wrote:
> (Pulling in Peter and Stephen)
>
> On Tue, 29 Apr, at 11:28:17AM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> >
> > The patches look fine to me, they've been through several rounds of
> > review already. How do we propose these get merged as the
(Pulling in Peter and Stephen)
On Tue, 29 Apr, at 11:28:17AM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
>
> The patches look fine to me, they've been through several rounds of
> review already. How do we propose these get merged as the series
> contains both generic and arm64 patches? And there are dependencies
>
On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 05:09:04PM +0100, Leif Lindholm wrote:
> This set adds support for UEFI to the arm64 port - a stub loader, as
> well as runtime services support for efivars.
>
> It depends on some core EFI patches currently in linux-next.
The patches look fine to me, they've been through
On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 05:09:04PM +0100, Leif Lindholm wrote:
This set adds support for UEFI to the arm64 port - a stub loader, as
well as runtime services support for efivars.
It depends on some core EFI patches currently in linux-next.
The patches look fine to me, they've been through
(Pulling in Peter and Stephen)
On Tue, 29 Apr, at 11:28:17AM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
The patches look fine to me, they've been through several rounds of
review already. How do we propose these get merged as the series
contains both generic and arm64 patches? And there are dependencies
On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 12:43:56PM +0100, Matt Fleming wrote:
(Pulling in Peter and Stephen)
On Tue, 29 Apr, at 11:28:17AM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
The patches look fine to me, they've been through several rounds of
review already. How do we propose these get merged as the series
On 04/29/2014 04:43 AM, Matt Fleming wrote:
(Pulling in Peter and Stephen)
On Tue, 29 Apr, at 11:28:17AM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
The patches look fine to me, they've been through several rounds of
review already. How do we propose these get merged as the series
contains both generic and
On 04/29/2014 06:47 AM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
Waiting for the tip/x86/efi to be merged first is not a problem. We
also need a stable base for testing the arm64 UEFI series, so I assume
this series can be based onto tip/x86/efi (would such branch be rebased
before hitting mainline?).
On Tue, 29 Apr, at 02:47:28PM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
Waiting for the tip/x86/efi to be merged first is not a problem. We
also need a stable base for testing the arm64 UEFI series, so I assume
this series can be based onto tip/x86/efi (would such branch be rebased
before hitting mainline?).
On 04/29/2014 07:47 AM, Matt Fleming wrote:
On Tue, 29 Apr, at 02:47:28PM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
Waiting for the tip/x86/efi to be merged first is not a problem. We
also need a stable base for testing the arm64 UEFI series, so I assume
this series can be based onto tip/x86/efi (would such
On Tue, 29 Apr, at 07:56:20AM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
I'm wondering if it would be better to organize it into a separate topic
branch. We can still take it through tip, if you want, but it would be
better than putting it all into one tree.
Sure, that makes sense. I'll do that.
--
Matt
On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 03:47:13PM +0100, Matt Fleming wrote:
On Tue, 29 Apr, at 02:47:28PM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
Given that Leif's series contains both generic efi and arm64 patches,
what's your preference for merging them? I'm happy to add my ack and
they go via your tree (or the other
On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 04:27:07PM +0100, Matt Fleming wrote:
I'm wondering if it would be better to organize it into a separate topic
branch. We can still take it through tip, if you want, but it would be
better than putting it all into one tree.
Sure, that makes sense. I'll do that.
This set adds support for UEFI to the arm64 port - a stub loader, as
well as runtime services support for efivars.
It depends on some core EFI patches currently in linux-next.
This includes bits shared between arm and arm64 support.
Remaining bits required for arm support will be submitted
This set adds support for UEFI to the arm64 port - a stub loader, as
well as runtime services support for efivars.
It depends on some core EFI patches currently in linux-next.
This includes bits shared between arm and arm64 support.
Remaining bits required for arm support will be submitted
22 matches
Mail list logo
