This is _still_ a problem with 2.6.17.11
Thanks,
Scott.
Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 6 Jul 2006 20:47:35 -0700
> Chris Wedgwood <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Jul 06, 2006 at 06:14:53PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
>>
>>> I have both reversion patches queued up but haven't heard from
>>> anyone about anything.
>> i saw that --- i don't think it's right, but it's not more wrong than
>> having that merged as-is in the first place which i'll argue is wrong
>> by virtue of the fact we run the quirk everywhere and apparently break
>> things
>>
>>> I don't know if anyone's working on this bug.
>> it's not forgotten, i'm waiting to hear back from people still.
>> enabling ACPI *should* suffice, but for some people clearly it doesn't
>> (there are claims VIA got their ACPI wrong so this might explain why
>> it works for some people and not others)
>>
>>> Thursday is my subsystem-maintainer-spamming day, so the reverts
>>> will be heading Gregwards today.
>> like i said, i really don't think reverting the patches is technically
>> correct, but given that i don't have adequate hardware to test against
>> it might be the least painful option right now
>
> Yes, it's a question of whose machines we choose to break.
>
> It'd be great to get this thing nailed. Do the people who are out testing
> things need re-asking?
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to [email protected]
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
--
"Computer Science is no more about computers than astronomy is about
telescopes." - Edsger Dijkstra
On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 22:07:48 -0500
"Scott J. Harmon" <[email protected]> wrote:
> This is _still_ a problem with 2.6.17.11
>
We're all dazed and confused by now. It would help if you could
re-describe the problem from scratch, thanks