Re: [PATCH 0/3] coupled cpuidle state support

[Daniel Lezcano]

On 01/25/2012 03:04 PM, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
> On 01/20/2012 09:40 PM, Colin Cross wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 12:46 AM, Daniel Lezcano
> > <daniel.lezcano@xxxxxxxxxx>  wrote:
> > > Hi Colin,
> > >
> > > this patchset could be interesting to resolve in a generic way the cpu
> > > dependencies.
> > > What is the status of this patchset ?
> > I can't do much with it right now, because I don't have any devices
> > that can do SMP idle with a v3.2 kernel.  I've started working on an
> > updated version that avoids the spinlock, but it might be a while
> > before I can test and post it.  I'm mostly looking for feedback on the
> > approach taken in this patch, and whether it will be useful for other
> > SoCs besides Tegra and OMAP4.
>
> Hi Colin,
>
> I will be happy to test your patchset. Do you have a pointer to a more 
> recent kernel ?

Hi Colin,

sorry for bothering you. I am working on a cpuidle driver for an ARM SMP 
board, I will be really happy to test your patchset and look how it fits 
with the cpuidle driver.

Thanks
  -- Daniel
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/