Ok, I'll rebase and retest from linux-next then.
________________________________________ From: Rafael J. Wysocki [rjw@sisk.pl] Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2013 4:13 AM To: Viresh Kumar Cc: Nathan Zimmer; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; linux-pm@vger.kernel.org; cpufreq@vger.kernel.org; Shawn Guo; linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] cpufreq: cpufreq_driver_lock is hot on large systems
On Tuesday, February 05, 2013 03:28:30 PM Viresh Kumar wrote:
On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 3:33 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki rjw@sisk.pl wrote:
I actually don't agree with that, becuase the Nathan's apprach shows the reasoning that leads to the RCU introduction quite clearly. So if you don't have technical problems with the patchset, I'm going to take it as is.
Great!!
Okay.. I don't have any technical problems with it, i reviewed most of it carefully. The only pending thing is rebase on linux-next, after that i can give my ack for it.
Yes, it would be great if it were rebased and retested.
Thanks, Rafael
-- I speak only for myself. Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.