[PATCH v8 0/8] Consolidate cpuidle functionality

Rob Lee rob.lee at linaro.org
Wed Mar 21 04:45:04 UTC 2012

On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 7:10 PM, Kevin Hilman <khilman at ti.com> wrote:
> Hi Rob,
> Robert Lee <rob.lee at linaro.org> writes:
>> This patch series moves various functionality duplicated in platform
>> cpuidle drivers to the core cpuidle driver. Also, the platform irq
>> disabling was removed as it appears that all calls into
>> cpuidle_call_idle will have already called local_irq_disable().
>> These changes have been pulled into linux-next.
>> Len, Andrew, can a request be made for Linus to pull these changes?
>> Acked-by: Jean Pihet<j-pihet at ti.com>  (v6)
>> Tested-by: Jean Pihet<j-pihet at ti.com>  (v6, omap3)
>> Tested-by: Amit Daniel<amit.kachhap at linaro.org>  (v6, Exynos4)
>> Tested-by: Robert Lee<rob.lee at linaro.org>  (imx51, imx6q)
> Note that there's a space missing between the name and email in these
> tags (and for Deepthi's below also.)  That seems to exist in all the
> patches.

Thanks.  This is now fixed in my pull tree.

>> Reviewed-by: Kevin Hilman <khilman at ti.com>
> For my Reviewed-by, it only applies to the core code and the OMAP
> changes.  I haven't reviewed the other platform-specific drivers.  I
> believe the same applies to Jean Pihet who works with me on OMAP.
>> Reviewed-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano at linaro.org>
>> Reviewed-by: Deepthi Dharwar<deepthi at linux.vnet.ibm.com> (core cpuidle only)
> Looks like you never heard from anyone actively working on at91,
> shmobile, kirwood or davinci.
> I'm not sure we should merge those platform-specific changes without an
> ack from those platform maintainers.
> For 3.4, maybe we should just merge the core code and the platforms that
> have been reviewed/ack'd, and for 3.5, spent some time nagging the other
> platform maintainers to review and test.
> Kevin

More information about the linaro-dev mailing list