[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230916192709.5s22femf73pccmu3@airbuntu>
Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2023 20:27:09 +0100
From: Qais Yousef <qyousef@...alina.io>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@....com>,
Wei Wang <wvw@...gle.com>, Xuewen Yan <xuewen.yan94@...il.com>,
Hank <han.lin@...iatek.com>,
Jonathan JMChen <Jonathan.JMChen@...iatek.com>,
Hongyan Xia <hongyan.xia2@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] sched/uclamp: Set max_spare_cap_cpu even if
max_spare_cap is 0
On 09/14/23 08:39, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Qais Yousef <qyousef@...alina.io> wrote:
>
> > > Reviewed-by: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>
> >
> > Thanks for the review!
> >
> > I will wait for the maintainers to see if they would like a v5 to address
> > the nitpicks or it's actually good enough and happy to pick this up. I
> > think the commit messages explain the problem clear enough and doesn't
> > warrant sending a new version. But happy to do so if there's insistence
> > :-)
>
> Yeah, please always do that: sensible review replies with actionable
> feedback cause a semi-atomatic "mark this thread as read, there will be a
> next version" reflexive action from maintainers, especially if a series is
> in its 4th iteration already...
Apologies. I did realize that and intended to send a new version last weekend,
but failed to get to it. I hope to be able to do so today or tomorrow.
Thanks!
--
Qais Yousef
Powered by blists - more mailing lists