On Thu, 2010-07-29 at 12:41 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 13:15:29 -0600 > Ai Li <aili@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Thu, 2010-07-29 at 11:43 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > > > I'd be reluctant to merge this code without also having code which uses > > > it. As it is the change is useless and untestable. > > > > We have local code in the arch/arm/mach-msm branch that uses the new > > cpuidle code. We are still developing and testing the MSM patches, and > > hope to upstream them in a few weeks. > > > > grumble. > > Well, please at least explain all this in the changelogs when you send > out the next version. Sure. Or ... On Thu, 2010-07-29 at 12:25 -0700, Daniel Walker wrote: > On Thu, 2010-07-29 at 13:15 -0600, Ai Li wrote: > > On Thu, 2010-07-29 at 11:43 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > > > I'd be reluctant to merge this code without also having code which uses > > > it. As it is the change is useless and untestable. > > > > We have local code in the arch/arm/mach-msm branch that uses the new > > cpuidle code. We are still developing and testing the MSM patches, and > > hope to upstream them in a few weeks. > > We can just re-submit this patch with our msm cpuidle code when that is > finished. If the consensus is that this is the better way, I can resubmit at the later time. I'll send out a new version of the patch this week so to incorporate Andrew's comments. ~Ai -- Employee of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
