From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Received: from mail-ob0-f170.google.com (mail-ob0-f170.google.com
 [209.85.214.170])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 39C6D140088
 for <linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org>; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 16:38:13 +1100 (EST)
Received: by mail-ob0-f170.google.com with SMTP id uz6so3792497obc.29
 for <linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org>; Wed, 26 Mar 2014 22:38:11 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1395852947-22290-1-git-send-email-ego@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
References: <1395852947-22290-1-git-send-email-ego@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2014 11:08:11 +0530
Message-ID: <CAKohpom-mnOXpOUChasOMVTrRGknvZNA_bOcq6ZfGTRmUM5W9A@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] powernv: Dynamic Frequency Scaling Enablement
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
To: "Gautham R. Shenoy" <ego@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Cc: Linux PM list <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
 "linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org>,
 Anton Blanchard <anton@samba.org>,
 "Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List <linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/options/linuxppc-dev>,
 <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
List-Help: <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev>,
 <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=subscribe>

On 26 March 2014 22:25, Gautham R. Shenoy <ego@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> This is the v4 of the patchset to enable Dynamic Frequency Scaling
> on IBM PowerNV Platforms. I have incorporated the review comments
> from the previous version (can be found at [1]).

I wouldn't have added a cover-letter if I only have a single patch to
send. Would have rather used the not-to-be-commited field of the
patch instead.