lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Mar]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v8 0/8] Consolidate cpuidle functionality
Date
Arnd Bergmann <arnd.bergmann@linaro.org> writes:

> On Tuesday 20 March 2012, Kevin Hilman wrote:
>> Maybe it's time that drivers/cpuidle gets a maintainer. With lots of
>> discussions of scheduler changes that affect load estimation, I suspect
>> we're all going to have a bit of CPUidle work to do in the
>> not-so-distant future.
>
> Hmm, according to the script, you are the maintainer ;-)

doh, I knew I should've kept quiet :/

> $ scripts/get_maintainer.pl -f drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c
> Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com> (commit_signer:8/10=80%)
> Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com> (commit_signer:7/10=70%)
> Trinabh Gupta <g.trinabh@gmail.com> (commit_signer:4/10=40%)
> Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com> (commit_signer:4/10=40%)
> Deepthi Dharwar <deepthi@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (commit_signer:4/10=40%)
>
> While I realize that the get_maintainers.pl is not the final word,
> you could be the acting cpuidle maintainer for this merge window
> and send the pull request.

Not exactly the outcome I was hoping for (I have enough stuff to look
after at the moment.)

However, if you think it would help and won't be seen as a take over
attempt (I don't want to maintain CPUidle), I can possibly do it for
this merge window.

Before doing that though, I'll need give this series a final once over
before I'm willing to send a potentially flame-attracting pull request.

Kevin




\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-03-21 00:59    [W:0.060 / U:2.288 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site