Marcelo,
Saw you've inc'ed the EXTRAVERSION in bk, so I figured I should send
this fix to you before you mailed out pre11.
I'm not sure if its the "proper" fix, but solves:
arch/i386/kernel/kernel.o: In function `fix_broken_hp_bios_irq9':
arch/i386/kernel/kernel.o(.text.init+0x3601): undefined reference to
`broken_hp_bios_irq9'
arch/i386/kernel/kernel.o(.text.init+0x3614): undefined reference to
`broken_hp_bios_irq9'
thanks
-john
PS: agpgart seems broken as well, but I don't normally build w/ it, so
I'll leave the fix to someone who knows what they're doing.
--- 1.26/arch/i386/kernel/dmi_scan.c Thu Oct 10 16:12:50 2002
+++ edited/arch/i386/kernel/dmi_scan.c Tue Oct 15 00:55:36 2002
@@ -492,7 +492,7 @@
static __init int fix_broken_hp_bios_irq9(struct dmi_blacklist *d)
{
#ifdef CONFIG_PCI
- extern int broken_hp_bios_irq9;
+ int broken_hp_bios_irq9;
if (broken_hp_bios_irq9 == 0)
{
broken_hp_bios_irq9 = 1;
On Tue, 2002-10-15 at 11:40, john stultz wrote:
> I'm not sure if its the "proper" fix, but solves:
Actually, I'm sure that's not the right fix.
In fact its pretty horribly broken as well.
Sorry, next time I'll actually look at what I'm doing before mailing.
-john
On 15 Oct 2002, john stultz wrote:
> On Tue, 2002-10-15 at 11:40, john stultz wrote:
> > I'm not sure if its the "proper" fix, but solves:
>
> Actually, I'm sure that's not the right fix.
> In fact its pretty horribly broken as well.
>
> Sorry, next time I'll actually look at what I'm doing before mailing.
I'll remove the dmi update from Alan for 2.4.20-pre.
Thats a 2.4.21-pre thing.
On Tue, 2002-10-15 at 20:03, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> I'll remove the dmi update from Alan for 2.4.20-pre.
>
> Thats a 2.4.21-pre thing.
Its very much a 2.4.20 thing. Its just that it accidentally acquired the
HP entry as well which we dont want.
Lose the problem function and the HP specific quirk and you'll get the
bits that actually do matter
On 21 Oct 2002, Alan Cox wrote:
> On Tue, 2002-10-15 at 20:03, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> > I'll remove the dmi update from Alan for 2.4.20-pre.
> >
> > Thats a 2.4.21-pre thing.
>
> Its very much a 2.4.20 thing. Its just that it accidentally acquired the
> HP entry as well which we dont want.
>
> Lose the problem function and the HP specific quirk and you'll get the
> bits that actually do matter
I merged the HP Pavilion quirks on my tree and then backed it all out
later because I thought the changes were not necessary for 2.4.20.
Which issues the DMI update is addressing?
On Mon, 2002-10-21 at 17:07, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> > Lose the problem function and the HP specific quirk and you'll get the
> > bits that actually do matter
>
> I merged the HP Pavilion quirks on my tree and then backed it all out
> later because I thought the changes were not necessary for 2.4.20.
>
> Which issues the DMI update is addressing?
The stuff I sent you included a pile of correctness fixes for the DMI
code that are in dmidecode and came from the lm-sensors folk