On Wed, Dec 07, 2011 at 10:28:02PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Wednesday, December 07, 2011, Mark Brown wrote:
> > Well, I guess you could put patch 1 and 3 in then add 2 if an ack is
> > forthcoming for that - there's no direct dependency.
> It's been acked already, I'm going to pul all
On Wednesday, December 07, 2011, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 06, 2011 at 10:39:56PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Tuesday, December 06, 2011, Kukjin Kim wrote:
>
> > > Rafael, please let me know the branch when you create it so that I can
> > > merge
> > > it into Samsung tree to avo
On Tue, Dec 06, 2011 at 10:39:56PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Tuesday, December 06, 2011, Kukjin Kim wrote:
> > Rafael, please let me know the branch when you create it so that I can merge
> > it into Samsung tree to avoid other conflicts.
> I need an ack from Magnus or Paul on the shmo
On Tuesday, December 06, 2011, Kukjin Kim wrote:
> Mark Brown wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 05, 2011 at 01:15:18AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > On Monday, December 05, 2011, Mark Brown wrote:
> >
> > > > It might make sense for it to go via the Samsung tree - the third
> > patch
> > > > dep
On Tue, Dec 06, 2011 at 01:04:53PM +0100, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
Please fix your mailer to word wrap at less than 80 columns, I've
reflowed your text for legibility.
> What about similar patches for S5PV210/S5PC110 series and Exynos4?
I don't really have access to these systems (well, I have a
Hello,
On Tuesday, December 06, 2011 11:20 AM Kukjin Kim wrote:
> Mark Brown wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 05, 2011 at 01:15:18AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > On Monday, December 05, 2011, Mark Brown wrote:
> >
> > > > It might make sense for it to go via the Samsung tree - the third
> > p
Mark Brown wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 05, 2011 at 01:15:18AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Monday, December 05, 2011, Mark Brown wrote:
>
> > > It might make sense for it to go via the Samsung tree - the third
> patch
> > > depends on it and there's some other stuff going on with the s3c64xx
On Mon, Dec 05, 2011 at 01:15:18AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Monday, December 05, 2011, Mark Brown wrote:
> > It might make sense for it to go via the Samsung tree - the third patch
> > depends on it and there's some other stuff going on with the s3c64xx
> > power management - so let's
On Monday, December 05, 2011, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 04, 2011 at 09:56:59PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Thursday, December 01, 2011, Mark Brown wrote:
>
> > > Signed-off-by: Mark Brown
>
> > Looks good with the new version of [2/3].
>
> > Do you want me to takt it?
>
> It m
On Sun, Dec 04, 2011 at 09:56:59PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Thursday, December 01, 2011, Mark Brown wrote:
> > Signed-off-by: Mark Brown
> Looks good with the new version of [2/3].
> Do you want me to takt it?
It might make sense for it to go via the Samsung tree - the third patch
On Thursday, December 01, 2011, Mark Brown wrote:
> Since systems are likely to have power domains that can't be turned off
> for various reasons at least temporarily while implementing power domain
> support provide a default governor which will always refuse to power off
> the domain, saving plat
11 matches
Mail list logo
