Re: RFC: revert request for cpuidle patches e11538d1 and 69a37bea

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Friday, July 26, 2013 02:29:40 PM Rik van Riel wrote:
> On 07/26/2013 02:27 PM, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > On 7/26/2013 11:13 AM, Rik van Riel wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Could you try running the tests with just the repeat mode
> >> stuff from commit 69a37bea excluded, but leaving the common
> >> infrastructure and commit e11538?
> >>
> >
> > personally I think we should go the other way around.
> > revert the set entirely first, and now, and get our performance back
> > to what it should be
> >
> > and then see what we can add back without causing the regressions.
> > this may take longer, or be done in steps, and that's ok.
> >
> > the end point may well be the same... but we can then evaluate in the right
> > direction.
> 
> Works for me. I have no objection to reverting both patches,
> if the people planning to fix the code prefer that :)

OK, I'll queue up the reverts as fixes for 3.11-rc4.

Thanks,
Rafael

--
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/