On Mon, Mar 01, 2021 at 04:34:41PM +0100, Jiri Kosina wrote:

On Mon, 1 Mar 2021, Benjamin Tissoires wrote:

quoted

On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 8:34 PM Andy Shevchenko
[off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

The driver depends on ACPI, ACPI_PTR() resolution is always the same.
Otherwise a compiler may produce a warning.

That said, the rule of thumb either ugly ifdeffery with ACPI_PTR or
none should be used in a driver.

Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>

Thanks a lot for the series. This indeed cleans things up.

Indeed, thanks.

quoted

For the series:
Acked-by: Benjamin Tissoires <redacted>

Jiri, I wonder where we want to land this one. This is not strictly
bug fixes, but we could definitively sneak this one in 5.12-rc1.
Well, I should probably run the series on an acpi laptop here before
merging, but I'd like to know if delaying to 5.13 is OK or if we need
this in 5.12.

I'd like to do it the standard way and have it bake in for-next to see if 
it really doesn't break anything, so unless there are convicing arguments 
for 5.12-rcX, I'd rathre queue this for 5.13.

For the record, I'm not in hurry with this, up to you how to proceed.
Thanks!

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko