Date: Tue, 5 May 2015 11:01:23 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Michael Turquette <mturquette@linaro.org>
Cc: mingo@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, preeti@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
        Morten.Rasmussen@arm.com, riel@redhat.com, efault@gmx.de,
        nicolas.pitre@linaro.org, inaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org,
        daniel.lezcano@linaro.org, patches@linaro.org,
        eas-dev@lists.linaro.org, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com,
        vincent.guittot@linaro.org, amit.kucheria@linaro.org,
        juri.lelli@arm.com, rjw@rjwysocki.net, viresh.kumar@linaro.org,
        ashwin.chaugule@linaro.org, alex.shi@linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] sched: cpufreq_cfs: pelt-based cpu frequency scaling
Message-ID: <20150505090123.GD21418@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <1430777441-15087-1-git-send-email-mturquette@linaro.org>
 <1430777441-15087-5-git-send-email-mturquette@linaro.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1430777441-15087-5-git-send-email-mturquette@linaro.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2012-12-30)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 838
Lines: 17

On Mon, May 04, 2015 at 03:10:41PM -0700, Michael Turquette wrote:
> For those that are very curious, there were recently two previous
> postings of these patches to the public eas-dev mailing list. Of
> interest in those threads is the discussion around using a utilization
> threadhold versus purely matching frequency to capacity utilization
> versus using a margin (as this series does):
> 
> https://lists.linaro.org/pipermail/eas-dev/2015-April/000074.html
> https://lists.linaro.org/pipermail/eas-dev/2015-April/000115.html
> 

So why wasn't that done here? (and on linux-pm of course)
--
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/