On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 11:20 PM, Jonathan Corbet <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, 04 Jan 2017 23:11:30 +0100 > "Rafael J. Wysocki" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I'm assuming then, that you're going to handle cpufreq docs changes in the >> future. >> >> Some cpufreq patches update the docs too, though, so there may be changes in >> there coming from two sources. > > I saw it wasn't in linux-next yet, so figured I had to. :)
Well, it actually is there in my linux-next branch and I was going to include it in the next pull request. Still, I can drop it easily enough. :-) > If you'd rather I stayed away from there, I'll happily do so, just say > the word (and preferably send a MAINTAINERS update :). I can handle cpufreq docs updates, but if you think it's better to route them via the docs tree, that would be fine by me too. Thanks, Rafael
