Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1751809AbdG0JKh (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Thu, 27 Jul 2017 05:10:37 -0400
Received: from merlin.infradead.org ([205.233.59.134]:57208 "EHLO
        merlin.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1751779AbdG0JKf (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Thu, 27 Jul 2017 05:10:35 -0400
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2017 11:10:21 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Cc: "Joel Fernandes (Google)" <joel.opensrc@gmail.com>,
        Rafael Wysocki <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
        Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com>,
        Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        smuckle.linux@gmail.com, eas-dev@lists.linaro.org,
        Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com>
Subject: Re: [Eas-dev] [PATCH V4 1/3] sched: cpufreq: Allow remote cpufreq
 callbacks
Message-ID: <20170727091021.253yiqwzrn5qqi4m@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <cover.1501060871.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
 <8797d4993baa6580e3af741d081be492032ce9dd.1501060871.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
 <CAEi0qN=ipk9SR+3DYcLk-5SoKnsfK=PQV62VH9KAoXz2PDRkjQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20170727055026.GK352@vireshk-i7>
 <CAEi0qNnYANJ9qNAnh3H4F5igXvHhT8ujoVH3JjMgr_1aBvvcRg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20170727071441.GL352@vireshk-i7>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20170727071441.GL352@vireshk-i7>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170609 (1.8.3)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 205
Lines: 5

On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 12:44:41PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> Even that was discussed tomorrow with Peter :)

Just to clarify I don't have a time machine. That discussion was
_yesterday_,... I think :-)