On Mon, 1 Mar 2021, Benjamin Tissoires wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 8:34 PM Andy Shevchenko
> <andriy.shevche...@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > 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.shevche...@linux.intel.com>
> 
> Thanks a lot for the series. This indeed cleans things up.

Indeed, thanks.

> For the series:
> Acked-by: Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoi...@redhat.com>
> 
> 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.

Thanks,

-- 
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs

Reply via email to