[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <a2c05878-e112-9f6c-3da2-5c75ba38abc4@tu-dresden.de>
Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2018 17:58:32 +0200
From: Thomas Ilsche <thomas.ilsche@...dresden.de>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>
CC: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Paul McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Doug Smythies <dsmythies@...us.net>,
"Rik van Riel" <riel@...riel.com>,
Aubrey Li <aubrey.li@...ux.intel.com>,
"Mike Galbraith" <mgalbraith@...e.de>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Len Brown" <len.brown@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 00/10] sched/cpuidle: Idle loop rework
On 2018-04-08 18:32, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> The v9 along with some cleanups suggested by Frederic on top of it and with
> ACKs from Peter (obtained on IRC) is now available from the pm-cpuidle branch
> in the linux-pm.git tree.
>
> It has been added to my linux-next branch, so it probably will be picked up by
> linux-next tomorrow and I have a plan to push it for v4.17 in the second half
> of the next week unless a major issue with it is found in the meantime.
Great to hear that. Thanks for all your work.
I'm finishing up some analysis of corner cases, but nothing major.
So I'm glad to see this is moving along. I've been nitpicking a lot,
but this is clearly a huge improvement and there are practical
limitations against a theoretically perfect solution. In any case the
changes will also make future policy adaptions much easier.
Thanks,
Thomas
Download attachment "smime.p7s" of type "application/pkcs7-signature" (5214 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists