Daniel Lezcano writes:
> On 06/18/2012 08:15 PM, Colin Cross wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 1:40 AM, Daniel Lezcano
>> wrote:
>>> I propose to host a cpuidle-next tree where all these modifications will
>>> be and where people can send patches against, preventing last minutes
>>> conflicts an
On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 6:40 PM, Daniel Lezcano
wrote:
> On 06/25/2012 02:58 PM, Shilimkar, Santosh wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 7:00 PM, a0393909 wrote:
>>> Daniel,
>>>
>>>
>>> On 06/18/2012 02:10 PM, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
Dear all,
A few weeks ago, Peter De Schrijv
On 06/25/2012 02:58 PM, Shilimkar, Santosh wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 7:00 PM, a0393909 wrote:
>> Daniel,
>>
>>
>> On 06/18/2012 02:10 PM, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> A few weeks ago, Peter De Schrijver proposed a patch [1] to allow per
>>> cpu latencies. We had a dis
On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 7:00 PM, a0393909 wrote:
> Daniel,
>
>
> On 06/18/2012 02:10 PM, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>>
>>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> A few weeks ago, Peter De Schrijver proposed a patch [1] to allow per
>> cpu latencies. We had a discussion about this patchset because it
>> reverse the modifica
Daniel,
On 06/18/2012 02:10 PM, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
Dear all,
A few weeks ago, Peter De Schrijver proposed a patch [1] to allow per
cpu latencies. We had a discussion about this patchset because it
reverse the modifications Deepthi did some months ago [2] and we may
want to provide a differe
