[PATCH v2 1/2] efi/bgrt: Drop __initdata from bgrt_image_size

[Ard Biesheuvel]

On 3 July 2018 at 17:24, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
<b.zolnierkie at samsung.com> wrote:
> On Monday, July 02, 2018 02:02:47 PM Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>> On 2 July 2018 at 13:57, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
>> <b.zolnierkie at samsung.com> wrote:
>> > On Monday, July 02, 2018 01:46:09 PM Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>> >> On 2 July 2018 at 13:26, Hans de Goede <hdegoede at redhat.com> wrote:
>> >> > Bartlomiej,
>> >> >
>> >> > Now that the fbcon deferred console takeover patches have been
>> >> > merged I believe this series can be merged too ?
>> >> >
>> >> > Note the first patch has an ack from Ard for merging the
>> >> > 1 line efi change through the fbdev tree.
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> ... or I could take everything through the efi tree instead, as
>> >> already discussed between Bartlomiej and me in the context of another
>> >> patch series that touches both the fbdev and efi trees.
>> >>
>> >> Bartlomiej, that would require your ack on patch
>> >>
>> >> [PATCH v2 2/2] efifb: Copy the ACPI BGRT boot graphics to the framebuffer
>> >>
>> >> https://marc.info/?l=linux-fbdev&m=152933484616993&w=2
>> >>
>> >> so if you're ok with that, I will queue both of these for v4.19
>> >
>> > I would really prefer to merge this patchset through fbdev tree
>> > as efi tree doesn't have fbcon deferred console takeover patches
>> > (which are required by efifb changes under discussion).
>> >
>>
>> Ah ok, I didn't realise that. I don't think there will be any
>> conflicts, since the efifb changes in the efi tree and these changes
>> operate on different parts of the file. But let's double check before
>> taking stuff into -next.
>> (efi/next is not pulled into -next directly, but via the tip:efi tree,
>> and I haven't sent a pull request yet for v4.19)
>
> I've verified this with -next from today and it auto-merged fine (for
> testing purposes I've applied both patches to -next and then pulled in
> efi/next from efi.git tree).
>
> I've applied both patches to fbdev-for-next (I hope it is fine with you).
>

Absolutely fine, and thanks for double checking.