From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tejun Heo Subject: Re: [PATCH] Hard disk S3 resume time optimization Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 15:47:48 -0700 Message-ID: <20130516224748.GB14875@mtj.dyndns.org> References: <11E08D716F0541429B7042699DD5C1A16B97B58D@FMSMSX103.amr.corp.intel.com> <20130516224441.GA14875@mtj.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130516224441.GA14875@mtj.dyndns.org> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org To: "Brandt, Todd E" Cc: "linux-ide@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" , Jeff Garzik , Jens Axboe , Greg Kroah-Hartman , "arjan@linux.intel.com" List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 03:44:41PM -0700, Tejun Heo wrote: > So, while I agree about the problem and the solution seems to be > headed the right way of making SCSI suspend/resume asynchronous, > what's going on with patch splitting, submission format and comments? > Please read up on patch submission (there gotta be enough people in > OSTC to point you to the right direction) and retry. Please also cc Rafael J. Wysocki and linux-pm@vger.kernel.org next time. Thanks! -- tejun