On Mon, 2012-01-16 at 10:16 +0000, Matt Fleming wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-01-16 at 10:55 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > Does your new patch apply cleanly on top of the revert? If not
> > then please send an updated one, so that we can investigate its
> > effects.
>
> Good point, it doesn't apply cleanly. Here's an updated version rebased
> against Linus' tree.
Ping? Keith, have you had chance to test this patch yet?
--
Matt Fleming, Intel Open Source Technology Center
<#part sign=pgpmime>
On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 12:46:49 +0000, Matt Fleming <[email protected]> wrote:
> Ping? Keith, have you had chance to test this patch yet?
No, I haven't had a chance to try the patch, and I'm leaving on vacation
tomorrow until March 1...
--
[email protected]
On Wed, 2012-02-08 at 09:15 -0800, Keith Packard wrote:
> <#part sign=pgpmime>
> On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 12:46:49 +0000, Matt Fleming <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Ping? Keith, have you had chance to test this patch yet?
>
> No, I haven't had a chance to try the patch, and I'm leaving on vacation
> tomorrow until March 1...
Hmm... I haven't been able to find anybody else willing to test this
patch either.
Ingo, got any opinions on how to handle this?
--
Matt Fleming, Intel Open Source Technology Center
* Matt Fleming <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-02-08 at 09:15 -0800, Keith Packard wrote:
> > <#part sign=pgpmime>
> > On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 12:46:49 +0000, Matt Fleming <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > Ping? Keith, have you had chance to test this patch yet?
> >
> > No, I haven't had a chance to try the patch, and I'm leaving
> > on vacation tomorrow until March 1...
>
> Hmm... I haven't been able to find anybody else willing to
> test this patch either.
>
> Ingo, got any opinions on how to handle this?
Please send the latest and I'll apply it. If we don't get
voluntary testers then involuntary ones will have to do :-/
Thanks,
Ingo