On Monday, April 22, 2013 08:44:30 AM Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 22 April 2013 05:00, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > Applied to linux-pm.git/linux-next, although please check the result,
> > because
> > the patchwork version of the patch wasn't quite applicable and I fixed it up
> > manually.
>
> Ye
On 22 April 2013 05:00, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> Applied to linux-pm.git/linux-next, although please check the result, because
> the patchwork version of the patch wasn't quite applicable and I fixed it up
> manually.
Yes it looks fine and that's why i have attached the patch with my
email earl
On Monday, April 15, 2013 10:52:28 PM Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 15 April 2013 21:37, Dirk Brandewie wrote:
> > If the intel_pstate driver is being used __cpufreq_governor() should NOT be
> > called intel_pstate does not implement the target() callback.
> >
> > Nathan's commit 5800043b2 changed the
On Wednesday, April 17, 2013 04:04:46 PM Sedat Dilek wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 7:22 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > On 15 April 2013 21:37, Dirk Brandewie wrote:
> >> If the intel_pstate driver is being used __cpufreq_governor() should NOT be
> >> called intel_pstate does not implement the tar
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 7:22 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 15 April 2013 21:37, Dirk Brandewie wrote:
>> If the intel_pstate driver is being used __cpufreq_governor() should NOT be
>> called intel_pstate does not implement the target() callback.
>>
>> Nathan's commit 5800043b2 changed the fence ar
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 7:57 PM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 7:51 PM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 7:22 PM, Viresh Kumar
>> wrote:
>>> On 15 April 2013 21:37, Dirk Brandewie wrote:
If the intel_pstate driver is being used __cpufreq_governor() should NOT b
On 04/15/2013 12:42 PM, Dirk Brandewie wrote:
On 04/15/2013 10:27 AM, Nathan Zimmer wrote:
On 04/15/2013 11:07 AM, Dirk Brandewie wrote:
On 04/13/2013 02:55 AM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 12:51 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki
wrote:
On Friday, April 12, 2013 11:08:37 PM Sedat Dilek wro
On 04/15/2013 10:51 AM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 7:22 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
On 15 April 2013 21:37, Dirk Brandewie wrote:
If the intel_pstate driver is being used __cpufreq_governor() should NOT be
called intel_pstate does not implement the target() callback.
Nathan's com
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 7:51 PM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 7:22 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>> On 15 April 2013 21:37, Dirk Brandewie wrote:
>>> If the intel_pstate driver is being used __cpufreq_governor() should NOT be
>>> called intel_pstate does not implement the target() call
On 04/15/2013 10:27 AM, Nathan Zimmer wrote:
On 04/15/2013 11:07 AM, Dirk Brandewie wrote:
On 04/13/2013 02:55 AM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 12:51 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Friday, April 12, 2013 11:08:37 PM Sedat Dilek wrote:
On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 6:27 PM, Sedat Dil
On 04/15/2013 11:07 AM, Dirk Brandewie wrote:
On 04/13/2013 02:55 AM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 12:51 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Friday, April 12, 2013 11:08:37 PM Sedat Dilek wrote:
On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 6:27 PM, Sedat Dilek
wrote:
On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 5:45 PM, Se
On 15 April 2013 21:37, Dirk Brandewie wrote:
> If the intel_pstate driver is being used __cpufreq_governor() should NOT be
> called intel_pstate does not implement the target() callback.
>
> Nathan's commit 5800043b2 changed the fence around the call to
> __cpufreq_governor() in __cpufreq_remove_
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 6:07 PM, Dirk Brandewie
wrote:
> On 04/13/2013 02:55 AM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 12:51 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>>
>>> On Friday, April 12, 2013 11:08:37 PM Sedat Dilek wrote:
On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 6:27 PM, Sedat Dilek
wrote:
On 04/13/2013 02:55 AM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 12:51 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Friday, April 12, 2013 11:08:37 PM Sedat Dilek wrote:
On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 6:27 PM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 5:45 PM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 4:2
On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 12:51 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Friday, April 12, 2013 11:08:37 PM Sedat Dilek wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 6:27 PM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>> > On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 5:45 PM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>> >> On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 4:24 PM, Sedat Dilek
>> >> wrote:
On Friday, April 12, 2013 11:08:37 PM Sedat Dilek wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 6:27 PM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 5:45 PM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> >> On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 4:24 PM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> >>> On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 10:23 AM, Viresh Kumar
> >>> wrote:
> >>
On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 10:23 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 10 April 2013 11:44, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>> I found this "[RFC PATCH] kbuild: Build linux-tools package with 'make
>> deb-pkg'" from February 2012.
>> Can't say what happened to it...
>
> Sedat,
>
> Sorry for being late. I am down with Fev
On 10 April 2013 11:44, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> I found this "[RFC PATCH] kbuild: Build linux-tools package with 'make
> deb-pkg'" from February 2012.
> Can't say what happened to it...
Sedat,
Sorry for being late. I am down with Fever and throat infection since few days.
Still struggling with it..
On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 7:53 AM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 7:41 AM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 6:51 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>>> On 9 April 2013 21:38, Sedat Dilek wrote:
With x=3 the system gets in an unuseable state.
root# echo 0 > /sys/
On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 7:41 AM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 6:51 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>> On 9 April 2013 21:38, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>> With x=3 the system gets in an unuseable state.
>>>
>>> root# echo 0 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu3/online
>>>
>>> I could not write my
On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 6:51 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 9 April 2013 21:38, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>> With x=3 the system gets in an unuseable state.
>>
>> root# echo 0 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu3/online
>>
>> I could not write my reply and had to do a hard/cold reboot.
>> The dmesg log I sa
On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 8:39 PM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 8:29 PM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 8:26 PM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>> On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 6:51 PM, Viresh Kumar
>>> wrote:
On 9 April 2013 21:38, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> With x=3 the system ge
On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 6:51 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 9 April 2013 21:38, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>> With x=3 the system gets in an unuseable state.
>>
>> root# echo 0 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu3/online
>>
>> I could not write my reply and had to do a hard/cold reboot.
>> The dmesg log I sa
On 9 April 2013 21:38, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> With x=3 the system gets in an unuseable state.
>
> root# echo 0 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu3/online
>
> I could not write my reply and had to do a hard/cold reboot.
> The dmesg log I saw looked similiar to my digicam-shot.
Few things i need from
On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 4:56 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 9 April 2013 19:34, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>> I have seen it on reboots.
>> How to online/offline from sysfs?
>
> offline a cpu "x" with:
>
> echo 0 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpux/online
>
> and online with echo 1 > to same location.
With x=3
On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 4:56 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 9 April 2013 19:34, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>> I have seen it on reboots.
>> How to online/offline from sysfs?
>
> offline a cpu "x" with:
>
> echo 0 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpux/online
>
> and online with echo 1 > to same location.
Eh, yeah
On 9 April 2013 19:33, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Tuesday, April 09, 2013 02:47:39 PM Sedat Dilek wrote:
>> On reboot I see hanging cpufreq with the help of kdb/kgdb?
>> See screenshot.
>>
>> I have also a screenshot with next-20130326, so this issue seems not to be
>> new.
>
> This is during
On 9 April 2013 19:34, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> I have seen it on reboots.
> How to online/offline from sysfs?
offline a cpu "x" with:
echo 0 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpux/online
and online with echo 1 > to same location.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" i
On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 4:03 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Tuesday, April 09, 2013 02:47:39 PM Sedat Dilek wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 11:30 AM, Stephen Rothwell
>> wrote:
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > Changes since 20130408:
>> >
>> > The vfs tree still had its build failure so I used the vers
On Tuesday, April 09, 2013 02:47:39 PM Sedat Dilek wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 11:30 AM, Stephen Rothwell
> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Changes since 20130408:
> >
> > The vfs tree still had its build failure so I used the version from
> > next-20130405.
> >
> > The wireless-next tree lost its
30 matches
Mail list logo
