On 18/10/2018 12:06, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 11:54 AM Daniel Lezcano > <daniel.lezc...@linaro.org> wrote: >> >> On 18/10/2018 11:42, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >>> On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 11:36 AM Daniel Lezcano >>> <daniel.lezc...@linaro.org> wrote: >>>> >>>> It was suggested to set the scene for the PM components in the >>>> scheduler code organization in the recent discussion about making the >>>> scheduler aware of the capacity capping from the thermal framework. >>>> >>>> Move the cpufreq files into its own directory as suggested at: >>>> >>>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/10/18/353 >>>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/10/18/408 >>> >>> Fair enough, but do we need to do that right now? >> >> I'm not planning to do more code reorg than this patch right now. Up to >> you to decide if you are willing to take them. > > The SPDX one certainly is applicable, but I'm not sure about the other one > TBH. > > Why don't you add the SPDX IDs to those files as they are for now?
Yes, sure. -- <http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook | <http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter | <http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog
