On 8 April 2013 22:29, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> Looks like Amit was left off the patch 0, and missed the power savings
> explanation that you did there. Perhaps you should have included that in
> each patch change log.
He isn't supposed to miss any of my emails, he is my manager :)
Don't know if
On Mon, 2013-04-01 at 10:55 +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 1 April 2013 10:50, Amit Kucheria wrote:
> > On Sun, Mar 31, 2013 at 8:01 PM, Viresh Kumar
> > wrote:
> >> This patch adds system wide system_freezable_unbound_wq which will be used
> >> by
> >> code that currently uses system_freezabl
On 1 April 2013 10:50, Amit Kucheria wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 31, 2013 at 8:01 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>> This patch adds system wide system_freezable_unbound_wq which will be used by
>> code that currently uses system_freezable_wq and can be moved to unbound
>> workqueues.
>
> _Why_ do i need this c
On Sun, Mar 31, 2013 at 8:01 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> This patch adds system wide system_freezable_unbound_wq which will be used by
> code that currently uses system_freezable_wq and can be moved to unbound
> workqueues.
_Why_ do i need this change?
> Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar
> ---
> inclu
This patch adds system wide system_freezable_unbound_wq which will be used by
code that currently uses system_freezable_wq and can be moved to unbound
workqueues.
Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar
---
include/linux/workqueue.h | 4
kernel/workqueue.c| 7 ++-
2 files changed, 10 insert
5 matches
Mail list logo
