Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1660270 > unrolled thread
| Started by | "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-06-08 00:00 +0200 |
| Last post | 2017-06-08 10:00 +0200 |
| Articles | 2 — 2 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: [PATCH RFC 1/2] thermal/cpu idle cooling: Introduce cpu idle cooling driver "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org> - 2017-06-08 00:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH RFC 1/2] thermal/cpu idle cooling: Introduce cpu idle cooling driver Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> - 2017-06-08 10:00 +0200
| From | "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-08 00:00 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH RFC 1/2] thermal/cpu idle cooling: Introduce cpu idle cooling driver |
| Message-ID | <tPR9E-3Ll-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 11:50 PM, Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> wrote: > On Tue, Jun 06, 2017 at 09:11:35AM +0530, viresh kumar wrote: >> + Daniel > > Hi Viresh, > > thanks for the head up. > > Before going deeply in the review, I have a dumb question: > > Why isn't this mechanism implemented at the scheduler level? I suppose for the same reason why intel_powerclamp is not implemented like that: the scheduler maintainers don't like the idea. Thanks, Rafael
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-08 10:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tQ0wi-1oo-37@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1660270 |
On Wed, Jun 07, 2017 at 11:59:12PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 11:50 PM, Daniel Lezcano > <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 06, 2017 at 09:11:35AM +0530, viresh kumar wrote: > >> + Daniel > > > > Hi Viresh, > > > > thanks for the head up. > > > > Before going deeply in the review, I have a dumb question: > > > > Why isn't this mechanism implemented at the scheduler level? > > I suppose for the same reason why intel_powerclamp is not implemented > like that: the scheduler maintainers don't like the idea. Ok, I see. Thanks. -- Daniel -- <http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook | <http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter | <http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web