On 10 July 2014 16:45, Srivatsa S. Bhat <srivatsa@xxxxxxx> wrote: > Looks good to me. But I think it would be better to move the invocation of > kobject_move() to update_policy_cpu() itself, so that update_policy_cpu() > will do all the work involved in updating the policy->cpu, as its name suggests. > > With that small nit, > > Reviewed-by: Srivatsa S. Bhat <srivatsa@xxxxxxx> Hi Rafael, I had a chat with Srivatsa about this patch and the V2 version which people aren't able to test yet. I proposed that we take this patch as is and hold V2 for some time. - V2 wouldn't apply cleanly to stable kernels for sure - V2 isn't yet tested and V1 is. - Saravana already proposed a patch which would remove most of what V2 is adding: http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg346604.html Our chats: <vireshk> srivatsa, http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg346604.html <srivatsa> vireshk, thanks for the pointer.. will try to take a look by tonight.. <vireshk> srivatsa, Because saravana is actually looking to change much of the stuff, what about dropping the V2 fix that I sent yesterday and take V1 only for now? <vireshk> srivatsa, As V1 would apply cleanly over stable kernels as well <srivatsa> vireshk, sure, no problem... perhaps you can make the code reorganization of the kobject_move as a separate patch and submit it for merge window instead of -rc <vireshk> srivatsa, I was even thinking of that as well <vireshk> Have two patches, only first one for rc and second one for next release <vireshk> srivatsa, But the second patch would be overwritten by Saravanna, so might not be of any use <srivatsa> vireshk, ah, i see.. in that case, we can hold off on the second patch for now.. just v1 should do.. What do you say? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html