Re: [PATCH v2] acpi: intel_idle : break dependency between modules

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Friday, June 29, 2012, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
> On 06/28/2012 09:24 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Thursday, June 28, 2012, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
> >> When the system is booted with some cpus offline, the idle
> >> driver is not initialized. When a cpu is set online, the
> >> acpi code call the intel idle init function. Unfortunately
> >> this code introduce a dependency between intel_idle and acpi.
> >>
> >> This patch is intended to remove this dependency by using the
> >> notifier of intel_idle. This patch has the benefit of
> >> encapsulating the intel_idle driver and remove some exported
> >> functions.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > 
> > This one looks good to me too.
> > 
> > Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx>
> 
> Thanks for the review Rafael.
> 
> > Len, are you going to take it?
> 
> Rafael, Len,
> 
> After the discussion [1], I put in place a tree at:
> 
> ssh://git.linaro.org/srv/git.linaro.org/git/people/dlezcano/cpuidle-next.git
> #cpuidle-next
> 
> I proposed this tree to group the cpuidle modifications and prevent the
> last minutes conflict when Len will apply them.
> 
> I also included the tree into linux-next for wider testing.

I can't speak for Len, but I'm not sure he'll like this.

Anyway, you seem to have the same material as Len in that tree, won't there
be any conflicts in linux-next?

Rafael
--
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/