[Git pull request] fix to the vexpress/mcpm branch
nicolas.pitre at linaro.org
Wed Aug 14 23:47:03 EDT 2013
On Wed, 14 Aug 2013, Olof Johansson wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 1:40 PM, Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre at linaro.org> wrote:
> >> The reason I'm asking is that I applied this on next/soc instead of
> >> vexpress/mcpm, and we're asking downstream maintainers to not base anthing on
> >> next/* branches because it _might_ happen that we rebuild them.
> > Looking into my inbox, I have the following emails from Lorenzo:
> > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.power-management.general/36794
> > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.power-management.general/37006
> > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.power-management.general/37007
> > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.arm.kernel/260441
> > You apparently were CC'd on all of them, and Lorenzo asked you on two
> > occasions how you wanted to handle this, and one of them is an explicit
> > pull request addressed to you.
> Ok. I was well aware of the cpuidle series, the reason for why I was
> asking was that it was unclear if you were referring to that or
> something else beyond that.
No, it's only the cpuidle series... for now.
More information about the linux-arm-kernel