Raphael Manfredi wrote:
>
> Quoting Robbert Kouprie <[email protected]> from ml.linux.kernel:
> :BTW, did you get any explanation why this wasn't applied in -ac or main
> :kernel?
>
> None.
>
> But I know that this patch is dirty because it attacks a hardware-dependent
> layer from a rather generic one. This may be why it's rejected. And it
> may also be completely APIC-BP6 specific.
>
> I also know is that it works for me. ;-)
I'll try it. Have you considered resubmitting the patch,
hidden behind a CONFIG_BROKEN_APIC? That'll keep the code
clean for those with better hardware.
Helge Hafting