From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Greg KH Subject: Re: PowerOp Design and working patch Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2006 17:45:46 -0700 Message-ID: <20060729004546.GA3917@kroah.com> References: <242d827d33807b6b46608a26ed29c273@mvista.com> <20060728233837.GG2140@kroah.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: linux-pm-bounces@lists.osdl.org Errors-To: linux-pm-bounces@lists.osdl.org To: david singleton Cc: David Singleton , linux-pm@lists.osdl.org List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jul 28, 2006 at 05:38:11PM -0700, david singleton wrote: > = > On Jul 28, 2006, at 4:38 PM, Greg KH wrote: > = > >On Fri, Jul 28, 2006 at 03:31:41PM -0700, david singleton wrote: > >>Here is a patch that implements a version of the PowerOp concept. > > > >Any chance of breaking this up into logical patches that do one thing = > >at > >a time so it can be reviewed better? > > > >thanks, > > > >greg k-h > > > Here's powerop-core.patch, powerop-cpufreq.patch and = > powerop-x86-centrino.patch. Um, no, that's not how kernel patches are submitted. How about one per email, with a description of what they do, inline so we can quote them in a message (and actually read them in the original message...) See patches posted here by others as examples of what is expected, and see Documentation/SubmittingPatches for more details. thanks, greg k-h