[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <51507FFA.4020403@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2013 12:48:58 -0400
From: Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>
To: "Mansoor, Illyas" <illyas.mansoor@...el.com>
CC: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, X86 <x86@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Matthew Garrett <matthew.garrett@...ula.com>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"Rudramuni, Vishwesh M" <vishwesh.m.rudramuni@...el.com>,
"richard@....at" <richard@....at>,
"josh@...htriplett.org" <josh@...htriplett.org>,
"Kumar P, Mahesh" <mahesh.kumar.p@...el.com>,
"Sil, Dyut K" <dyut.k.sil@...el.com>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: fix idle notifier not being called in CONFIG_X86_32
I'm okay with this patch since it makes 32-bit and 64-bit consistent,
and technically, it fixes a regression.
If/when we get rid of the notifier, we should do it for both 32-and
64-bit at the same time.
It isn't clear to me that Alex's work will solve this particular
problem, or that there is a code or logical conflict -- though
maybe you are referring to some code I've not read yet.
So for this trivial patch...
Acked-by: Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>
But I think the bigger problem here is the expectation that out of tree
drivers will not break. The interactive governor is not upstream.
Len Brown, Intel Open Source Technology Center
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists