linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/4] CPUFreq: Implement per policy instances of governors

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 4 Feb 2013 17:54:18 +0530
From:	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
Cc:	cpufreq@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linaro-dev@...ts.linaro.org,
	robin.randhawa@....com, Steve.Bannister@....com,
	Liviu.Dudau@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] CPUFreq: Implement per policy instances of governors

On 4 February 2013 17:47, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...k.pl> wrote:
> Well, [1-2/4] are things I can take for v3.9 no problem.  The other two I'd
> wait for the next cycle to be honest.  We already have 30+ cpufreq patches
> scheduled for v3.9 and some of them quite subtle for that matter.

To be honest, i wanted to get these in 3.9 :) .
And that's why hurried on them and got this full series working in a single
day of work :)

Anyway, i understand your point and i also believe last two patches require some
testing/review before these getting in.

One important point i would like to highlight is:
governors directory would be present in cpu/cpu*/cpufreq/ now instead
of cpu/cpufreq/.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/