On 12 January 2013 03:41, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> Can any one of you two create a series of patches for me to take for v3.9
> with all of the correct Tested-by and Reviewed-by etc. tags, because I've
> already lost track of your multiple versions and threads?
:)
I will.
--
To unsubscribe from
On Thursday, January 10, 2013 04:10:55 PM Shawn Guo wrote:
> On 10 January 2013 16:05, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > Another thing, can i have a tested-by from you for both my patches ? remove
> > and
> > add dev?
> >
> For both:
>
> Tested-by: Shawn Guo
OK
Can any one of you two create a series
On Thursday, January 10, 2013 04:10:55 PM Shawn Guo wrote:
On 10 January 2013 16:05, Viresh Kumar viresh.ku...@linaro.org wrote:
Another thing, can i have a tested-by from you for both my patches ? remove
and
add dev?
For both:
Tested-by: Shawn Guo shawn@linaro.org
OK
Can any
On 12 January 2013 03:41, Rafael J. Wysocki r...@sisk.pl wrote:
Can any one of you two create a series of patches for me to take for v3.9
with all of the correct Tested-by and Reviewed-by etc. tags, because I've
already lost track of your multiple versions and threads?
:)
I will.
--
To
On 9 January 2013 16:50, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
> +static void update_policy_cpu(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, unsigned int
> cpu)
> +{
> + cpufreq_frequency_table_update_policy_cpu(old_cpu, cpu);
> +
On 10 January 2013 16:05, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> Another thing, can i have a tested-by from you for both my patches ? remove
> and
> add dev?
>
For both:
Tested-by: Shawn Guo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
On 10 January 2013 13:24, Shawn Guo wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 09, 2013 at 04:50:44PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>> @Shawn: I believe your driver don't require that ugly code anymore (Though i
>> know there is a situation for that to happen, if we have two cpus, you remove
>> second one and then add it
On 10 January 2013 13:24, Shawn Guo wrote:
> Yes, just played it and it works for me. However, I would have to keep
> that little ugly code in my patch to save the dependency on your patch.
> Will send a follow-up to clean that up once your patch hits mainline.
Good. Hopefully, patches from
On 10 January 2013 13:24, Shawn Guo shawn@linaro.org wrote:
Yes, just played it and it works for me. However, I would have to keep
that little ugly code in my patch to save the dependency on your patch.
Will send a follow-up to clean that up once your patch hits mainline.
Good. Hopefully,
On 10 January 2013 13:24, Shawn Guo shawn@linaro.org wrote:
On Wed, Jan 09, 2013 at 04:50:44PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
@Shawn: I believe your driver don't require that ugly code anymore (Though i
know there is a situation for that to happen, if we have two cpus, you remove
second one
On 10 January 2013 16:05, Viresh Kumar viresh.ku...@linaro.org wrote:
Another thing, can i have a tested-by from you for both my patches ? remove
and
add dev?
For both:
Tested-by: Shawn Guo shawn@linaro.org
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the
On 9 January 2013 16:50, Viresh Kumar viresh.ku...@linaro.org wrote:
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
+static void update_policy_cpu(struct cpufreq_policy *policy, unsigned int
cpu)
+{
+ cpufreq_frequency_table_update_policy_cpu(old_cpu, cpu);
+
On Wed, Jan 09, 2013 at 04:50:44PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> @Shawn: I believe your driver don't require that ugly code anymore (Though i
> know there is a situation for that to happen, if we have two cpus, you remove
> second one and then add it back. With this cpufreq_add_dev() would call
On 9 January 2013 21:09, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> I have tried that too, it is also pushed at:
>
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/12/16/5
Bad link :(
http://git.linaro.org/gitweb?p=arm/big.LITTLE/mp.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/cpufreq-fixes-v2
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line
On 9 January 2013 21:09, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 9 January 2013 16:50, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>> [Probably need to simplify cpufreq_add_dev() too, but that can be done as
>> next
>> step.]
>
> I have tried that too, it is also pushed at:
>
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/12/16/5
>
> [Untested for
On 9 January 2013 16:50, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> [Probably need to simplify cpufreq_add_dev() too, but that can be done as next
> step.]
I have tried that too, it is also pushed at:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/12/16/5
[Untested for now, will be doing it tomorrow]
From: Viresh Kumar
Date: Wed, 9
__cpufreq_remove_dev() is called on multiple occasions: cpufreq_driver
unregister and cpu removals.
Current implementation of this routine is overly complex without much need. If
the cpu to be removed is the policy->cpu, we remove the policy first and add all
other cpus again from policy->cpus
__cpufreq_remove_dev() is called on multiple occasions: cpufreq_driver
unregister and cpu removals.
Current implementation of this routine is overly complex without much need. If
the cpu to be removed is the policy-cpu, we remove the policy first and add all
other cpus again from policy-cpus and
On 9 January 2013 16:50, Viresh Kumar viresh.ku...@linaro.org wrote:
[Probably need to simplify cpufreq_add_dev() too, but that can be done as next
step.]
I have tried that too, it is also pushed at:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/12/16/5
[Untested for now, will be doing it tomorrow]
From:
On 9 January 2013 21:09, Viresh Kumar viresh.ku...@linaro.org wrote:
On 9 January 2013 16:50, Viresh Kumar viresh.ku...@linaro.org wrote:
[Probably need to simplify cpufreq_add_dev() too, but that can be done as
next
step.]
I have tried that too, it is also pushed at:
On 9 January 2013 21:09, Viresh Kumar viresh.ku...@linaro.org wrote:
I have tried that too, it is also pushed at:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/12/16/5
Bad link :(
http://git.linaro.org/gitweb?p=arm/big.LITTLE/mp.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/cpufreq-fixes-v2
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send
On Wed, Jan 09, 2013 at 04:50:44PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
@Shawn: I believe your driver don't require that ugly code anymore (Though i
know there is a situation for that to happen, if we have two cpus, you remove
second one and then add it back. With this cpufreq_add_dev() would call init()
22 matches
Mail list logo
