lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [May]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [more markup]  [less markup]  [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
FromFrans Pop <>
SubjectRe: [git head] Should X86_PAT really default to yes?
DateSun, 25 May 2008 17:08:47 +0200
On Wednesday 07 May 2008, Venki Pallipadi wrote:
> On Mon, May 05, 2008 at 07:32:40PM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
> > Note that the "expected mapping type" errors remain the same both with
> > and without framebuffer console.>> The patch below plugs the mprotect hole and should eliminate the
> "expected mapping type" error messages. Can you check.

Hi,

My apologies for the very late reply. Unfortunately I've had no time for 
work on kernel issues the last few weeks.

I have not specifically tested any of the proposed patches, but I can 
confirm that the "expected mapping type" errors are gone with -rc2 
and -rc3. Thanks a lot.

The artifacts are still there though and frequently even worse than 
originally reported. I will open a bugzilla entry for that.

Cheers,
FJP


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-05-25 17:11    [from the cache]
©2003-2008