On 16 June 2014 18:09, Frederic Weisbecker fweisbec@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jun 09, 2014 at 09:38:10PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
At several instances we iterate over all possible clock-bases for a particular cpu-base. Whereas, we only need to iterate over active bases.
We already have for_each_active_base() now, which can be used at these places to generate more efficient code.
This patch updates all possible sites which were iterating over all possible clock-bases.
Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar viresh.kumar@linaro.org
Quite often it's good to split patches as we can. But here splitting patch 1 and 3 makes review slightly harder because we need to get back to patch 1 to check the correctness of some parts of patch 3.
What would you think about merging both?
Hmm, I am fine with both as soon as patches goes upstream :) And so you suggest this: 2/3 as 1/2 1/3+3/3 as 2/2
Will do that while sending upstream..