From: "Grover, Andrew" <andrew.grover@intel.com>
To: "'Arjan van de Ven'" <arjanv@redhat.com>, marcelo@conectiva.com.br
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: RE: [BK PATCH] ACPI updates
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 15:29:56 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <EDC461A30AC4D511ADE10002A5072CAD04C7A56D@orsmsx119.jf.intel.com> (raw)
> From: Arjan van de Ven [mailto:arjanv@redhat.com]
> > Is your concern with the code, or the cmdline option? We
> could certainly
>
> the code, not so much the commandline option (that one is not used
> in practice), but actually my biggest concern is that you
> break existing
> setups, or at least change it more than needed. There is ZERO need to
> remove the existing working (and lean) code, even though your
> code might
> also be able to do the same. It means people suddenly need to
> change all
> kinds of config options, it's different code so will work slightly
> different... unifying 2.5 is nice and all but there's no need for that
> here since both implementations can coexist trivially (as the
> United Linux
> kernel shows)
Well maybe that's what we should do - use the UnitedLinux ACPI patch (which
iirc is based on fairly recent ACPI code, and presumably minimizes
ACPI-related breakage) and then proceed incrementally from there?
Sound OK? Marcelo? UL folks?
Regards -- Andy
PS probably involve some work breaking out the ACPI stuff from the UL patch
as a whole, or maybe (???) the UL people already have it broken out?
next reply other threads:[~2002-12-03 23:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-12-03 23:29 Grover, Andrew [this message]
2002-12-03 23:47 ` Arjan van de Ven
2002-12-04 12:58 ` Dave Jones
2002-12-05 17:06 ` Pavel Machek
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-05-24 0:15 Grover, Andrew
2002-12-06 1:36 Grover, Andrew
2002-12-06 16:50 ` Pavel Machek
2002-12-03 18:39 Grover, Andrew
2002-12-03 19:31 ` Alan Cox
2002-12-03 23:00 ` Arjan van de Ven
2002-12-02 19:29 Grover, Andrew
2002-12-03 9:31 ` Arjan van de Ven
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=EDC461A30AC4D511ADE10002A5072CAD04C7A56D@orsmsx119.jf.intel.com \
--to=andrew.grover@intel.com \
--cc=arjanv@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=marcelo@conectiva.com.br \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®