No one appears to be willing to review this one :) I will review it for validation style.
On 22 January 2015 at 06:55, Maxim Uvarov <[email protected]> wrote: > On 01/22/2015 12:06 PM, Savolainen, Petri (NSN - FI/Espoo) wrote: > >> >> -----Original Message----- >>> From: [email protected] [mailto:lng-odp- >>> [email protected]] On Behalf Of ext Ciprian Barbu >>> Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2015 3:36 PM >>> To: Ola Liljedahl >>> Cc: lng-odp >>> Subject: Re: [lng-odp] [PATCH] validation: add odp_schedule_pause and >>> odp_schedule_resume tests >>> >>> On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 3:28 PM, Ola Liljedahl <[email protected] >>> > >>> wrote: >>> >>>> On 7 January 2015 at 20:41, Mike Holmes <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I am unsure if I need to pay attention to this for 0.7.0 >>>>> >>>> We need to have a decision (and implementation) for ODP 1.0 though. >>>> Scheduling and its semantics are important aspects of ODP. >>>> >>> The odp_schedule_pause API is already documented and implemented, I >>> didn't exactly catch from Petri if we will keep the behavior for 1.0, >>> but what is the problem with covering this API in its current form for >>> at least 0.7 and 0.8? >>> >> >> There are no plans to change schedule pause/resume API. >> >> -Petri >> > So we are adding this patch, right? > > Maxim. > > >> >> _______________________________________________ >> lng-odp mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp >> > > > _______________________________________________ > lng-odp mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp > -- *Mike Holmes* Linaro Sr Technical Manager LNG - ODP
_______________________________________________ lng-odp mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp
