On 2016/9/8 19:01, Will Deacon wrote:

On Thu, Sep 01, 2016 at 02:54:51PM +0800, Zhen Lei wrote:

quoted

v7 -> v8:
Updated patches according to Will Deacon's review comments, thanks.

The changed patches is: 3, 5, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15
Patch 3 requires an ack from Rob Herring.
Patch 10 requires an ack from linux-mm.

Hi, Will:
Something should still be clarified:
Patch 5, I modified it according to my last reply. BTW, The last sentence
         "srat_disabled() ? -EINVAL : 0" of arm64_acpi_numa_init should be moved
         into acpi_numa_init, I think.
         
Patch 9, I still leave the code in arch/arm64.
         1) the implementation of setup_per_cpu_areas on all platforms are different.
         2) Although my implementation referred to PowerPC, but still something different.

Patch 15, I modified the description again. Can you take a look at it? If this patch is
	  dropped, the patch 14 should also be dropped.

Patch 16, How many times the function node_distance to be called rely on the APP(need many tasks
          to be scheduled), I have not prepared yet, so I give up this patch as your advise. 

Ok, I'm trying to pick the pieces out of this patch series and it's not
especially easy. As far as I can tell:

  Patch 3 needs an ack from the device-tree folks

Rob just acked.

  Patch 10 needs an ack from the memblock folks

I'll immediately send a email to remind them.

  Patch 11 depends on patch 10

  Patches 14,15,16 can wait for the time being (I still don't see their
  value).

OK, that's no problem. So I put them in the end beforehand.

So, I could pick up patches 1-2, 4-9 and 12-13 but it's not clear whether

Now you can also add patch 3.

that makes any sense. The whole series seems to be a mix of trivial printk

The most valueable patches are: patch 2, 9, 11. The other is just because of a programmer wants the code to be nice.

cleanups, a bunch of core OF stuff, some new features and then some
questionable changes at the end.

Please throw me a clue,

Will

.