linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 10/10] mach-ux500: update and move cpufreq driver

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]

Message-ID: <20110510055926.GA2747@redhat.com>
Date:	Tue, 10 May 2011 01:59:26 -0400
From:	Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>
To:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc:	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...ricsson.com>,
	Samuel Ortiz <sameo@...ux.intel.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/10] mach-ux500: update and move cpufreq driver

On Fri, May 06, 2011 at 03:22:33PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
 > On Friday 06 May 2011, Linus Walleij wrote:
 > > 
 > > From: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
 > > 
 > > This updates the ux500 cpufreq driver to the new interface from the
 > > updated DB8500 PRCMU driver and moves it to drivers/cpufreq as
 > > discussed with Dave Jones.
 > > 
 > > The Makefile change in drivers/cpufreq will collide with Daves commit
 > > moving cpufreq drivers into drivers/cpufreq/*, this needs to be fixed up
 > > in next or the merge window since this driver depend deeply on other
 > > changes in this patchset and GPIO consolidation.
 > > 
 > > Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
 > > Cc: Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>
 > > Signed-off-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
 > 
 > Looks good for all I can tell, but please split this into two patches,
 > one for the conversion to the new interface and one for the actual
 > move. That would make it possible to review the changes you did.

Haven't had chance to really read much patches the last few days
(travelling until the 16th).  Due to the patch collisions we'll keep
seeing on kconfig/Makefiles, should these go via the cpufreq tree,
or do people want to still push them through their respective arch trees ?

When I'm back, I'm happy to take them if that's the decision.

	Dave

--
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/