[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAKohpo=btXn-T8KVixzOJWYhkL5eatShHoq51h9b+ZvWdNXHgA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 12 Jun 2013 11:35:44 +0530
From:	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To:	Lukasz Majewski <l.majewski@...sung.com>
Cc:	"Rafael J. Wysocky" <rjw@...k.pl>,
	"cpufreq@...r.kernel.org" <cpufreq@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux PM list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
	Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
	Jonghwa Lee <jonghwa3.lee@...sung.com>,
	Myungjoo Ham <myungjoo.ham@...sung.com>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Lukasz Majewski <l.majewski@...ess.pl>,
	Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@...aro.org>,
	Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
	Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] cpufreq:boost: CPU Boost mode support
On 12 June 2013 11:30, Lukasz Majewski <l.majewski@...sung.com> wrote:
> As you pointed out in the other mail 1/3 has its own issues, but I
> think that patches 2/3 and 3/3 are an integral part of the boost
> support and bring better overall overview to the design.
Yes they are. Undoubtedly.
>> Maybe you can just send v3 of 1/3. 2/3 and 3/3 can be sent when we
>> have finalized 2/3 and 3/3 's version.
>
> I'd opt for sending the whole patchset (it shouldn't be so difficult to
> adjust those patches), since it is easier for me to test.
Okay.
--
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
 
