* New PowerManagement - cpufreq category? @ 2004-02-16 8:14 Dominik Brodowski 2004-02-16 15:43 ` Martin J. Bligh 0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread From: Dominik Brodowski @ 2004-02-16 8:14 UTC (permalink / raw) To: bugme-admin, davej; +Cc: cpufreq [-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 290 bytes --] Quoting ------- Additional Comment #1 From Len Brown 2004-02-14 22:53 ------- from bug #2081: "(we really should have a better category than power-management/other for cpufreq stuff)" What do you think about a new component "cpufreq" as part of "Power Management"? Dominik [-- Attachment #1.2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --] [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 143 bytes --] _______________________________________________ Cpufreq mailing list Cpufreq@www.linux.org.uk http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/cpufreq ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: New PowerManagement - cpufreq category? 2004-02-16 8:14 New PowerManagement - cpufreq category? Dominik Brodowski @ 2004-02-16 15:43 ` Martin J. Bligh 2004-02-16 18:59 ` Dominik Brodowski 0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread From: Martin J. Bligh @ 2004-02-16 15:43 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dominik Brodowski, bugme-admin; +Cc: cpufreq --Dominik Brodowski <mail@dominikbrodowski.de> wrote (on Monday, February 16, 2004 09:14:12 +0100): > Quoting > ------- Additional Comment #1 From Len Brown 2004-02-14 22:53 ------- > from bug #2081: > "(we really should have a better category than power-management/other for > cpufreq stuff)" > > > What do you think about a new component "cpufreq" as part of > "Power Management"? If it's a separated component that's receiving a fair number of bugs, then yes we could. Who is the maintainer, and where does it lie under the source tree? M. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: New PowerManagement - cpufreq category? 2004-02-16 15:43 ` Martin J. Bligh @ 2004-02-16 18:59 ` Dominik Brodowski 2004-02-16 22:52 ` Martin J. Bligh 0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread From: Dominik Brodowski @ 2004-02-16 18:59 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Martin J. Bligh; +Cc: bugme-admin, cpufreq [-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 928 bytes --] On Mon, Feb 16, 2004 at 07:43:25AM -0800, Martin J. Bligh wrote: > --Dominik Brodowski <mail@dominikbrodowski.de> wrote (on Monday, February 16, 2004 09:14:12 +0100): > > > Quoting > > ------- Additional Comment #1 From Len Brown 2004-02-14 22:53 ------- > > from bug #2081: > > "(we really should have a better category than power-management/other for > > cpufreq stuff)" > > > > > > What do you think about a new component "cpufreq" as part of > > "Power Management"? > > If it's a separated component that's receiving a fair number of bugs, Currently, the open bugs #2025, #2081, #1696 and #2111 would fall under this category. Maybe I missed some, though. > then yes we could. Who is the maintainer, Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com> > and where does it lie under the source tree? drivers/cpufreq/ and, for i386 [though other archs also support cpufreq] arch/i386/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/ Dominik [-- Attachment #1.2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --] [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 143 bytes --] _______________________________________________ Cpufreq mailing list Cpufreq@www.linux.org.uk http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/cpufreq ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: New PowerManagement - cpufreq category? 2004-02-16 18:59 ` Dominik Brodowski @ 2004-02-16 22:52 ` Martin J. Bligh 0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread From: Martin J. Bligh @ 2004-02-16 22:52 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dominik Brodowski; +Cc: bugme-admin, cpufreq --On Monday, February 16, 2004 19:59:08 +0100 Dominik Brodowski <linux@dominikbrodowski.de> wrote: > On Mon, Feb 16, 2004 at 07:43:25AM -0800, Martin J. Bligh wrote: >> --Dominik Brodowski <mail@dominikbrodowski.de> wrote (on Monday, February 16, 2004 09:14:12 +0100): >> >> > Quoting >> > ------- Additional Comment #1 From Len Brown 2004-02-14 22:53 ------- >> > from bug #2081: >> > "(we really should have a better category than power-management/other for >> > cpufreq stuff)" >> > >> > >> > What do you think about a new component "cpufreq" as part of >> > "Power Management"? >> >> If it's a separated component that's receiving a fair number of bugs, > Currently, the open bugs #2025, #2081, #1696 and #2111 would fall under this > category. Maybe I missed some, though. > >> then yes we could. Who is the maintainer, > Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com> > >> and where does it lie under the source tree? > drivers/cpufreq/ and, for i386 [though other archs also support cpufreq] > arch/i386/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/ I double-checked with davej ... now created and he owns it, thanks to Jon ;-) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2004-02-16 22:52 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2004-02-16 8:14 New PowerManagement - cpufreq category? Dominik Brodowski 2004-02-16 15:43 ` Martin J. Bligh 2004-02-16 18:59 ` Dominik Brodowski 2004-02-16 22:52 ` Martin J. Bligh
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.