On 2016-11-19 19:53:21 [-0800], Guenter Roeck wrote:
> Problem is that I have no idea if any of the patches in this series really
> work.
> I wasn't copied on all patches, meaning I don't have the infrastructure,
> meaning
> I'll have to dig them up from patchwork for testing, and/or figure out i
On 11/19/2016 02:53 PM, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
On 2016-11-19 09:23:31 [-0800], Guenter Roeck wrote:
Applied to -next.
Thanks. Since you took that one, could you also please consider to apply
|[PATCH 06/20 v2] hwmon/via-cputemp: Convert to hotplug state machine
? It depends on the 5th
On 2016-11-19 09:23:31 [-0800], Guenter Roeck wrote:
> Applied to -next.
Thanks. Since you took that one, could you also please consider to apply
|[PATCH 06/20 v2] hwmon/via-cputemp: Convert to hotplug state machine
? It depends on the 5th patch from the series which applied.
> Thanks,
> Guenter
On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 07:35:26PM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> From: Thomas Gleixner
>
> The check loop for the cpu type is pointless as we already have a cpu model
> match before that. The only thing which is not covered by that check would
> be a smp system with two different core
From: Thomas Gleixner
The check loop for the cpu type is pointless as we already have a cpu model
match before that. The only thing which is not covered by that check would
be a smp system with two different cores. Not likely to happen.
Cc: Jean Delvare
Cc: Guenter Roeck
Cc: linux-hw...@vger.k
5 matches
Mail list logo
