From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261465AbULFDgp (ORCPT ); Sun, 5 Dec 2004 22:36:45 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261463AbULFDgp (ORCPT ); Sun, 5 Dec 2004 22:36:45 -0500 Received: from fmr20.intel.com ([134.134.136.19]:40660 "EHLO orsfmr005.jf.intel.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261465AbULFDgn (ORCPT ); Sun, 5 Dec 2004 22:36:43 -0500 Subject: Re: [BKPATCH] ACPI for 2.6.10 From: Len Brown To: "Marcos D. Marado Torres" Cc: Linus Torvalds , Kernel Mailing List , ACPI Developers In-Reply-To: References: <1101945436.8026.392.camel@d845pe> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Message-Id: <1102304175.2312.25.camel@d845pe> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.3 Date: 05 Dec 2004 22:36:16 -0500 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 2004-12-03 at 13:46, Marcos D. Marado Torres wrote: > If this release is equivalent with -mm's bk-acpi.patch from > 2.6.10-rc2-mm1 to 2.6.10-rc2-mm4, > notice that this kernels' bk-acpi patches have the bug > described in http://lkml.org/lkml/2004/11/16/263 , so I wouldn't > really like to > see this pull done to 2.6.10 until the problem is solved... > > If you want, I can try this patch to see if it acts like > bk-acpi.patch, but I guess it does... Please try 2.6.10-rc3, which includes this set of patches. Yes, this set of patches includes most of what was in -mm, but not everything. Note also, that it includes some more recent patches, including a poweroff fix, that was not in the -mm patches above. If your system still fails I'll be very interested to figure out exactly what we did to make it stop working. thanks, -Len