Return-path: Received: from mail-ww0-f44.google.com ([74.125.82.44]:44202 "EHLO mail-ww0-f44.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756093Ab1B1QwE (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Feb 2011 11:52:04 -0500 Received: by wwb22 with SMTP id 22so3289449wwb.1 for ; Mon, 28 Feb 2011 08:52:03 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <1298874054-3803-1-git-send-email-vnatarajan@atheros.com> <20110228142243.GB25724@kroah.com> Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 22:22:02 +0530 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [stable] [stable 2.6.37][PATCH] ath9k: Fix ath9k to allow CPU to enter C3 state. From: Vivek Natarajan To: "Luis R. Rodriguez" Cc: Greg KH , Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, stable@kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 8:18 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 6:22 AM, Greg KH wrote: >> On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 11:50:53AM +0530, Vivek Natarajan wrote: >>> The default qos value of 55 causes higher power consumption >>> and the battery drains out quickly. So, remove the pm_qos request >>> in the driver and the throughout issue in the Intel Pinetrail >>> platforms in which the DMA latency is seen can be fixed with >>> the following script: >>> http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/mcgrof/scripts/cpudmalatency.c >>> http://johannes.sipsolutions.net/files/netlatency.c.txt >>> >>> More details can be found in the following bugzilla link: >>> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=27532 >>> >>> Cc: stable@kernel.org >>> Signed-off-by: Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan >>> Signed-off-by: Vivek Natarajan >> >> Why did you send me 3 copies of this patch, when I don't need any copies >> of it? >> >> Totally confused, > > Vivek, please only ask John to send this to David as stable so it can > get into 2.6.38-rc, then once there you can refer the sha1sum from > Linus' tree and justify propagating into the stable series. > I had sent separate patches for v2.6.37 and for v2.6.38 since the patch could not be applied directly to previous versions. So, should I send this rebased patch for v2.6.37 only after it makes it into v2.6.38? Vivek.