From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759472Ab3BGXBT (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Feb 2013 18:01:19 -0500 Received: from hydra.sisk.pl ([212.160.235.94]:59953 "EHLO hydra.sisk.pl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756383Ab3BGXBR (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Feb 2013 18:01:17 -0500 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" To: Viresh Kumar Cc: valdis.kletnieks@vt.edu, artem.savkov@gmail.com, cpufreq@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org, robin.randhawa@arm.com, Steve.Bannister@arm.com, Liviu.Dudau@arm.com, dirk.brandewie@gmail.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] CPUFreq Fixes for 3.9 Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2013 00:07:37 +0100 Message-ID: <1947746.IyFppZQEx8@vostro.rjw.lan> User-Agent: KMail/4.9.5 (Linux/3.8.0-rc6; KDE/4.9.5; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: References: <2158181.aoVXdpLJe2@vostro.rjw.lan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thursday, February 07, 2013 06:52:20 PM Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 7 February 2013 18:35, Rafael J. Wysocki 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.