[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <BLUPR12MB0420E27CC06AF3C4046F68DAEBCD0@BLUPR12MB0420.namprd12.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2016 02:23:02 +0000
From: "Yu, Xiangliang" <Xiangliang.Yu@....com>
To: Allen Hubbe <Allen.Hubbe@....com>,
"jdmason@...zu.us" <jdmason@...zu.us>,
"dave.jiang@...el.com" <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
"linux-ntb@...glegroups.com" <linux-ntb@...glegroups.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
CC: SPG_Linux_Kernel <SPG_Linux_Kernel@....com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH V3 0/2] AMD NTB V3 changes
> > From: Xiangliang Yu <Xiangliang.Yu@....com>
> >
> > Main changes in V3
> > 1. Remove all power managment related code.
>
> Can you send the third patch with the power management code? I think it is
> important functionality.
Actually, I have answered the question in V2 comments. Now again,
I want to submitted all power management related code if runtime part is ready.
> Furthermore, a review of the power management patch will help with
> getting the flush patch accepted. If the power management patch is
> reviewed and acked as is, the flush patch is probably ok, too, as is. If there
> are changes to power management that are also applicable to the flush patch,
> it would be good to keep it all consistent when adding the functionality to the
> api.
I want to add flush function into ntb_transport.c, but I can't verify the implementation
Because hardware is not ready. So I just define a interface this time for future use.
I notice there are lot of interface that hasn't been used in ntb.h.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists