From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: john.stultz@linaro.org (John Stultz)
Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 16:50:04 -0700
Subject: [PATCH 5/4] sched: Make ARM's sched_clock generic for all
 architectures
In-Reply-To: <20130531221358.GF599@codeaurora.org>
References: <1366417746-24990-1-git-send-email-sboyd@codeaurora.org>
 <1367369675-13535-1-git-send-email-sboyd@codeaurora.org>
 <51A90ACE.7070906@linaro.org> <20130531221358.GF599@codeaurora.org>
Message-ID: <51A9372C.8060107@linaro.org>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On 05/31/2013 03:13 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> On 05/31, John Stultz wrote:
>> On 04/30/2013 05:54 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
>>> Here's the patch to make sched_clock generic. I didn't know
>>> where to put it so I just made a new file in kernel/sched
>>> for now.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>
>> Hey Stephen,
>>      Baruch just asked a question about moving arm's sched_clock.c to
>> be generic, and it sounded familiar, so I dug around and found this
>> mail from a few months ago.
>>
>> Just wanted to follow up and see what the status is with this? Is
>> this queued somewhere already?
>>
> As far as I know nothing has been queued. I refreshed the
> patchset against 3.10-rc2 but haven't sent it out since it wasn't
> clear if anyone wanted it. Shall I send it again?

Please. Even if it need an eventual deeper rework to be totally generic, 
I think we need to start moving things in that generic direction. 
Baruch's case is a clear example where non-arm code could share it, so I 
think that's at least a good proof point that sharing is actually needed 
(rather then just for theoretical reasons).

thanks
-john