lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [May]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/6] cpufreq: use generic cpufreq drivers for Exynos4210platform
    Date
    On Thursday, May 14, 2015 10:40:46 AM Viresh Kumar wrote:
    > On 14-05-15, 13:07, Kukjin Kim wrote:
    > > On 05/13/15 23:08, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
    > > >
    > > > Hi,
    > > >
    > > Hi Bart,
    > >
    > > > On Friday, April 03, 2015 06:43:43 PM Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
    > > >> Hi,
    > > >>
    > > >> This patch series removes the use of Exynos4210 specific support
    > > >> from cpufreq-exynos driver and enables the use of cpufreq-dt driver
    > > >> for this platform.
    > > >
    > > > Gentle Ping. Mike/Kukjin/Viresh could you please review/ack relevant
    > > > patches (patches #1-3 are for clock subsystem, patches #4-5 for Exynos
    > > > mach/dts and patch #6 is for cpufreq subsystem)?
    >
    > Sorry I thought I already Acked an older version of this set and so
    > didn't went for it again. Done now.

    Thanks!

    > > Yes, I totally agreed with this patches for arch side changes and this
    > > approach when Thomas posted.
    > >
    > > > Also what is your
    > > > preferred way to upstream them (patches are not independent so it would
    > > > be best to merge them through one tree, otherwise synchronization of
    > > > git pulls between different subsystem trees will be needed)?
    > > >
    > > I can provide topic branch for arch side changes even it is small. I
    > > think once Viresh and Mike make each topic branch based on -rc or the
    > > smallest changes from each subsystem then I could handle this series or
    > > Viresh or Mike need to handle this series with merging each topic
    > > branches in subsystem. I'm fine either way.
    > >
    > > Viresh and Mike, how do you think about that?
    >
    > For cpufreq subsystem changes, you can take them in your tree.
    >
    > > > I'm still hoping that this patchset will make it into v4.2 as there are
    > > > no known issues with it (except minor coding nit for patch #5)...
    > > >
    > > Sure, why not :-)
    >
    > One thing that looked wrong to me is the email id of Thomas..
    > I believe he has already left Samsung and his id wouldn't exist
    > anymore. Right ?

    This doesn't seem to be a case. His email doesn't bounce and his
    id exists (I've just checked this). I think that he is just very
    busy with some other work.

    > Then I wouldn't recommend something that doesn't exist to get merged
    > now. Probably use another email id of his.

    Best regards,
    --
    Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
    Samsung R&D Institute Poland
    Samsung Electronics



    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2015-05-14 13:21    [W:4.311 / U:0.188 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site