Re: [PATCH V4 0/2] Implement per policy instance of governor

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Sunday, March 31, 2013 07:00:16 AM Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 31 March 2013 03:38, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > OK, I'll remove it.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> > And by the way, I'm no longer amused with the mess going on in the cpufreq land.
> >
> > Please send me *patches*.  I'm not interested in git pointers.
> 
> Hmm.
> 
> > Moreover, please send those patches in a way allowing me to figure out the
> > ordering without looking into your git tree.
> 
> Yes, i was planning to do so.
> 
> > If you have a number of outstanding cpufreq patches for me to apply, please
> > create a patch series out of them and send it.
> 
> Do you mean, i should merge all stuff i have queued up for 3.10 in a
> single patchset?
> Like for-3.10? Will do.

Yes, thanks.

But the patches moving cpufreq drivers into drivers/cpufreq from somewhere else
need each an ACK from the maintainer of that other place.  I won't take any
patches like that without AKCs.

Thanks,
Rafael


-- 
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/