Re: [PATCH REGRESSION FIX] x86 idle: restore mwait_idle()

[Ian Malone]

On 15 March 2015 at 04:53, Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Sat, 2015-03-14 at 23:44 +0000, Ian Malone wrote:
>> On 18 January 2014 at 16:14, Mike Galbraith <bitbucket@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > On Sat, 2014-01-18 at 10:33 +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
>> >> On Fri, 2014-01-17 at 05:20 +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
>>
>> > Signed-off-by: Mike Galbraith <bitbucket@xxxxxxxxx>
>> > Cc: <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> # 3.10+
>> > ---
>> >  arch/x86/kernel/process.c |    9 ++++++---
>> >  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>> >
>> > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/process.c
>> > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/process.c
>> > @@ -427,18 +427,21 @@ static int prefer_mwait_c1_over_halt(con
>>
>> Hi, this series of patches never seem to have made it as far as the
>> mainline kernel, anyone know what needs to happen next?
>
> My plan is to keep on carrying it locally for as long as I run new
> kernels on crusty ole core2 boxen, then stop caring about them entirely
> like the rest of the planet :)
>

Looks like Ingo Molnar has committed to tip which is probably a good
sign, thanks all.
(Have to hand this system on to someone who wont be patching kernels...)

-- 
imalone
http://ibmalone.blogspot.co.uk
--
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/