Re: [PATCH 0/4] CPUFreq Fixes for 3.9

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Thursday, February 07, 2013 06:52:20 PM Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 7 February 2013 18:35, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > I think they all make sense, so applied to linux-next.
> >
> > I would prefer not to make any more changes to cpufreq before v3.9 from now on,
> > except for fixes and maybe the Drik's patchset that I kind of scheduled for
> 
> Dirk :)

Yes, sorry Dirk.

> > merging into bleeding-edge later today.
> 
> I probably have few more for you. Some sparse warnings to be fixed for
> Dirks work and an dangling exynos patch which is waiting for your reply :)

Which Exynos patch?

BTW, there still are locking problems in linux-next.  Why do we need
to take cpufreq_driver_lock() around driver->init() in cpufreq_add_dev(),
in particular?

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/