Messages in this thread | | | From | Nathan Zimmer <> | Subject | RE: [PATCH 0/2] cpufreq: cpufreq_driver_lock is hot on large systems | Date | Tue, 5 Feb 2013 14:58:35 +0000 |
| |
Ok, I'll rebase and retest from linux-next then.
________________________________________ From: Rafael J. Wysocki [rjw@sisk.pl] Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2013 4:13 AM To: Viresh Kumar Cc: Nathan Zimmer; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; linux-pm@vger.kernel.org; cpufreq@vger.kernel.org; Shawn Guo; linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] cpufreq: cpufreq_driver_lock is hot on large systems
On Tuesday, February 05, 2013 03:28:30 PM Viresh Kumar wrote: > On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 3:33 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> wrote: > > I actually don't agree with that, becuase the Nathan's apprach shows the > > reasoning that leads to the RCU introduction quite clearly. So if you > > don't have technical problems with the patchset, I'm going to take it as is. > > Great!! > > Okay.. I don't have any technical problems with it, i reviewed most of it > carefully. The only pending thing is rebase on linux-next, after that i can > give my ack for it.
Yes, it would be great if it were rebased and retested.
Thanks, Rafael
-- I speak only for myself. Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
| |