Re: [PATCH 0/5] Cpufreq Fixes for 3.9

2013-01-12 Thread Viresh Kumar
On 12 January 2013 18:57, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > There's no need to add a Tested-by for yourself if you sign-off a patch, > though. Tested-by is information that somebody *in* *addition* to the > original author has tested the patch, because we all should test the patches > we sign-off, right

Re: [PATCH 0/5] Cpufreq Fixes for 3.9

2013-01-12 Thread Rafael J. Wysocki
On Saturday, January 12, 2013 10:44:37 AM Viresh Kumar wrote: > Hi Rafael, > > As requested, i am resending all my cpufreq fixes together. I have added > correct > Tested-by flags. I have dropped the previous versions and applied this series instead. There's no need to add a Tested-by for yours

[PATCH 0/5] Cpufreq Fixes for 3.9

2013-01-11 Thread Viresh Kumar
Hi Rafael, As requested, i am resending all my cpufreq fixes together. I have added correct Tested-by flags. Viresh Kumar (5): cpufreq: Manage only online cpus cpufreq: Notify governors when cpus are hot-[un]plugged cpufreq: Don't use cpu removed during cpufreq_driver_unregister cpufreq: