Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753448Ab3FEImR (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Jun 2013 04:42:17 -0400 Received: from mail-oa0-f41.google.com ([209.85.219.41]:50295 "EHLO mail-oa0-f41.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753124Ab3FEImM (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Jun 2013 04:42:12 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <51AE025C.9030401@semaphore.gr> References: <51ACF2F1.1050600@semaphore.gr> <51AE025C.9030401@semaphore.gr> Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2013 14:12:11 +0530 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] cpufreq: Remove unused function __cpufreq_driver_getavg From: Viresh Kumar To: Stratos Karafotis Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, cpufreq@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 762 Lines: 18 On 4 June 2013 20:36, Stratos Karafotis wrote: > On 06/04/2013 08:19 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote: >> Should this be done in 3/3 ? >> > > acpi-cpufreq does not use mperf after 2/3. Why should we compile it with > CONFIG_X86_ACPI_CPUFREQ? > Do you want me to move the change in 3/3? I somehow feel now that 3/3 should come before 2/3 and then this change should be merged into it. And at the end we can have this patch as 3/3.. What do you say? core should go last and users/drivers must go first. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/