On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 03:20:59PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:

On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 04:16:49PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote:

quoted

On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 4:02 PM Will Deacon [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 08:03:29PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote:

quoted

Should this go through the mm or the arm tree?

I would certainly prefer to take at least the arm64 bits via the arm64 tree
(i.e. patches 1, 2 and 15). We also need a Documentation patch describing
the new ABI.

Sounds good! Should I post those patches together with the
Documentation patches from Vincenzo as a separate patchset?

Yes, please (although as you say below, we need a new version of those
patches from Vincenzo to address the feedback on v5). The other thing I
should say is that I'd be happy to queue the other patches in the series
too, but some of them are missing acks from the relevant maintainers (e.g.
the mm/ and fs/ changes).

Ok, I've queued patches 1, 2, and 15 on a stable branch here:

  https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/arm64/linux.git/log/?h=for-next/tbi

which should find its way into -next shortly via our for-next/core branch.
If you want to make changes, please send additional patches on top.

This is targetting 5.4, but I will drop it before the merge window if
we don't have both of the following in place:

  * Updated ABI documentation with Acks from Catalin and Kevin
  * The other patches in the series either Acked (so I can pick them up)
    or queued via some other tree(s) for 5.4.

Make sense?

Cheers,

Will

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel