On 16 March 2015 at 14:44, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 10 March 2015 at 18:35, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
>> Yeah, so I'd like PeterZ to ACK/NAK this approach before I move
>> forward with the patches - but he's on the road right now, so it
>> will take a week I suspect.
>
> Hi Ingo,
>
> Now that Peter
On 16 March 2015 at 14:44, Viresh Kumar viresh.ku...@linaro.org wrote:
On 10 March 2015 at 18:35, Ingo Molnar mi...@kernel.org wrote:
Yeah, so I'd like PeterZ to ACK/NAK this approach before I move
forward with the patches - but he's on the road right now, so it
will take a week I suspect.
On 10 March 2015 at 18:35, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> Yeah, so I'd like PeterZ to ACK/NAK this approach before I move
> forward with the patches - but he's on the road right now, so it
> will take a week I suspect.
Hi Ingo,
Now that Peter has already Acked them, will you be taking these as
is or
On 10 March 2015 at 18:35, Ingo Molnar mi...@kernel.org wrote:
Yeah, so I'd like PeterZ to ACK/NAK this approach before I move
forward with the patches - but he's on the road right now, so it
will take a week I suspect.
Hi Ingo,
Now that Peter has already Acked them, will you be taking these
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 02:05:41PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> Yeah, so I'd like PeterZ to ACK/NAK this approach before I move
> forward with the patches - but he's on the road right now, so it
> will take a week I suspect.
I stared at it between sessions today and it looks ok, so
Acked-by:
* Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 27 February 2015 at 17:21, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > Hi Thomas/Ingo,
> >
> > This is in response to the suggestions Ingo gave [1] on the shortcomings of
> > clockevents core's state machine.
> >
> > This first separates out the RESUME functionality from other states as
On 27 February 2015 at 17:21, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> Hi Thomas/Ingo,
>
> This is in response to the suggestions Ingo gave [1] on the shortcomings of
> clockevents core's state machine.
>
> This first separates out the RESUME functionality from other states as its a
> special case. Then it defines
On 27 February 2015 at 17:21, Viresh Kumar viresh.ku...@linaro.org wrote:
Hi Thomas/Ingo,
This is in response to the suggestions Ingo gave [1] on the shortcomings of
clockevents core's state machine.
This first separates out the RESUME functionality from other states as its a
special case.
* Viresh Kumar viresh.ku...@linaro.org wrote:
On 27 February 2015 at 17:21, Viresh Kumar viresh.ku...@linaro.org wrote:
Hi Thomas/Ingo,
This is in response to the suggestions Ingo gave [1] on the shortcomings of
clockevents core's state machine.
This first separates out the RESUME
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 02:05:41PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
Yeah, so I'd like PeterZ to ACK/NAK this approach before I move
forward with the patches - but he's on the road right now, so it
will take a week I suspect.
I stared at it between sessions today and it looks ok, so
Acked-by: Peter
Hi Thomas/Ingo,
This is in response to the suggestions Ingo gave [1] on the shortcomings of
clockevents core's state machine.
This first separates out the RESUME functionality from other states as its a
special case. Then it defines a new enum to map possible states of a clockevent
device.
Hi Thomas/Ingo,
This is in response to the suggestions Ingo gave [1] on the shortcomings of
clockevents core's state machine.
This first separates out the RESUME functionality from other states as its a
special case. Then it defines a new enum to map possible states of a clockevent
device.
12 matches
Mail list logo
