From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753812Ab3HDTg1 (ORCPT ); Sun, 4 Aug 2013 15:36:27 -0400 Received: from mga02.intel.com ([134.134.136.20]:44714 "EHLO mga02.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753755Ab3HDTg0 (ORCPT ); Sun, 4 Aug 2013 15:36:26 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.89,813,1367996400"; d="scan'208";a="381758354" Message-ID: <51FEAD39.2030909@linux.intel.com> Date: Sun, 04 Aug 2013 12:36:25 -0700 From: Arjan van de Ven User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130620 Thunderbird/17.0.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Greg KH CC: Srinivas Pandruvada , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Brown, Len" , "Rafael J. Wysocki" Subject: Re: [RFC v01 0/3] Power Capping Framework References: <1375466932-11842-1-git-send-email-srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com> <20130802222909.GA28831@kroah.com> <51FC4635.1040909@linux.intel.com> <20130803005336.GB31696@kroah.com> In-Reply-To: <20130803005336.GB31696@kroah.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 8/2/2013 5:53 PM, Greg KH wrote: >> I will post the one client driver, which is already using this >> framework as this series. >>> Ideally you will have more than one client driver submitted, as a >>> "framework" for just one driver seems a bit odd, don't you think? >> There are other groups and vendors interested in using this >> framework. But they want to make sure that this >> framework can go to upstream Linux. We will provide one client using >> this framework at this time. >> Do you think this is a problem? > > I would love to see the feedback from those groups and vendors as well, > to ensure that they agree with this. Ideally, they would sign off on > the patches, and provide clients that work with the framework at the > same time. Otherwise, I just have to take your word for it :) I suspect that in some ways Intel is a year or two ahead in this regard, we'll see if others are willing to speak up yet ;-)