On Saturday, August 03, 2013 06:58:35 PM Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 3 August 2013 17:37, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Saturday, August 03, 2013 05:19:18 PM Viresh Kumar wrote: > >> Hi Rafael, > >> > >> This patchset tries to fix & cleanup many existing cpufreq core issues. First > >> four patches tries to cleanup basic problems in cpufreq core. Its first patch > >> was earlier sent separately but now is part of this series. > >> > >> Fifth patch was also sent earlier as reply to your patches and was reviewed by > >> Srivatsa. Sixth patch was picked from Lukasz's patchset on introducing software > >> "boost" feature in core. It will be used by this patchset. > >> > >> And last four are the most significant part of this set. They try to make many > >> things simple and robust. > >> > >> This is rebased of your bleeding-edge branch + two patches from you: > >> 18a6b03 cpufreq: Avoid double kobject_put() for the same kobject in error code path > >> d0cde63 cpufreq: Do not hold driver module references for additional policy CPUs > >> abe513f Merge branch 'acpi-sleep-next' into linux-next > >> > >> They are also pushed in my cpufreq-next branch > > > > How much testing has that received so far? > > I planned to add this information but forgot at the last moment. It > was partially > tested. As it was mostly developed over the weekend I wasn't able to do much > of testing. I posted it to get early comments, and testing would complete by > beginning of next week. OK, thanks! -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe cpufreq" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
