Re: cpuidle future and improvements

2012-06-25 Thread Daniel Lezcano
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 and perhaps Lenb will agree to pul

Re: cpuidle future and improvements

2012-06-18 Thread Daniel Lezcano
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 and perhaps Lenb will agree to pul

Re: cpuidle future and improvements

2012-06-18 Thread Colin Cross
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 and perhaps Lenb will agree to pull from this tree. In the > meantime, the tree will

Re: cpuidle future and improvements

2012-06-18 Thread Peter De Schrijver
On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 02:35:42PM +0200, Daniel Lezcano wrote: > On 06/18/2012 01:54 PM, Deepthi Dharwar wrote: > > 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 di

Re: cpuidle future and improvements

2012-06-18 Thread Daniel Lezcano
On 06/18/2012 03:06 PM, Jean Pihet wrote: > Hi Daniel, > > On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 2:55 PM, Daniel Lezcano > wrote: >> On 06/18/2012 02:53 PM, Peter De Schrijver wrote: >>> On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 02:35:42PM +0200, Daniel Lezcano wrote: On 06/18/2012 01:54 PM, Deepthi Dharwar wrote: > On

Re: cpuidle future and improvements

2012-06-18 Thread Jean Pihet
Hi Daniel, On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 2:55 PM, Daniel Lezcano wrote: > On 06/18/2012 02:53 PM, Peter De Schrijver wrote: >> On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 02:35:42PM +0200, Daniel Lezcano wrote: >>> On 06/18/2012 01:54 PM, Deepthi Dharwar wrote: On 06/18/2012 02:10 PM, Daniel Lezcano wrote: >

Re: cpuidle future and improvements

2012-06-18 Thread Daniel Lezcano
On 06/18/2012 02:53 PM, Peter De Schrijver wrote: > On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 02:35:42PM +0200, Daniel Lezcano wrote: >> On 06/18/2012 01:54 PM, Deepthi Dharwar wrote: >>> On 06/18/2012 02:10 PM, Daniel Lezcano wrote: >>> Dear all, A few weeks ago, Peter De Schrijver proposed a pa

Re: cpuidle future and improvements

2012-06-18 Thread Daniel Lezcano
On 06/18/2012 01:54 PM, Deepthi Dharwar wrote: > 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

Re: cpuidle future and improvements

2012-06-18 Thread Deepthi Dharwar
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 dif