Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S265263AbTIEW3Q (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Sep 2003 18:29:16 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263150AbTIEW3Q (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Sep 2003 18:29:16 -0400 Received: from parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk ([195.92.249.252]:26517 "EHLO www.linux.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S265263AbTIEW3J (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Sep 2003 18:29:09 -0400 Message-ID: <3F590E28.6090101@pobox.com> Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 18:28:56 -0400 From: Jeff Garzik Organization: none User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021213 Debian/1.2.1-2.bunk X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrew de Quincey CC: torvalds@osdl.org, lkml , acpi-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-acpi@intel.com Subject: Re: [ACPI] Re: [PATCH] Next round of ACPI IRQ fixes (VIA ACPI fixed) References: <200309051958.02818.adq_dvb@lidskialf.net> <3F59018E.5060604@pobox.com> <200309060016.16545.adq_dvb@lidskialf.net> In-Reply-To: <200309060016.16545.adq_dvb@lidskialf.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1955 Lines: 49 Andrew de Quincey wrote: > On Friday 05 Sep 2003 10:35 pm, Jeff Garzik wrote: >>This is why we _really_ need you to split up your patches. Multiple >>split-up patches, one per email, is preferred. Don't worry about >>sending us too much email: we like it like that. > > > If/when I split it up, is it acceptable to number the patches to give the > order they have to be applied in? Absolutely. It's quite common for me to receive a series of emails, all patches, where each successive patch has a dependency on the preceding one. Linus just applies a patch series from Al Viro today which was presented as [PATCH] large dev_t - second series (1/15) [PATCH] large dev_t - second series (2/15) ... [PATCH] large dev_t - second series (15/15) Many of us have patch-applying scripts, which can apply an entire mbox full of patches. The email subject lines, the patch, and any text you wrote in the email are all commited to the BitKeeper repository as a single changeset. >>As an aside, I know at least part of the VIA irq routing stuff still >>needs fixing. For some on-board VIA southbridge devices, irq routing is >>accomplished by writing the PCI_INTERRUPT_xxx values to PCI config >>registers of the target device; for others, the normal pirq PCI config >>registers on the southbridge are used. Alan's new irq stuff in 2.4.x >>IMO should be merged into 2.6.x soonish, as Alan's work makes a big step >>towards making it possible to fix some of the harder-to-fix irq routing >>problems. > > > Is this still an issue when using ACPI? Surely it should insulate the OS from > this chipset-specific stuff? Correct, proper ACPI tables on VIA will avoid this problem. Jeff - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/