Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 18 Dec 2003 00:12:43 -0800 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: Linux 2.6.0 (ACPI) |
| |
Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com> wrote: > > > ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/must-fix/should-fix-7.txt > > We have 88 open bugs against ACPI (out of 216 total).
Poor Len ;)
> They fall into > two broad categories -- boot/configuration (eg. interrupt issues); and > run-time features (eg. acpi events -- power-down, fan control etc). > #1038 mentioned here has sort of grown out of control into "anything at > all wrong with anybody's IBM T40", so I'm not sure it will ever be > completely closed;-) > > I agree with Andy Grover's comments in this file that fixing the bugs > one by one in the current design is the highest priority; and I think > that strategy is showing positive results.
Great.
> > fixes appear in Andrew Morton's "-mm" tree, at > > > > ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/patches/2.6/ > > > > Now that you're back, we should probably pull the current 2.6.0 ACPI > patch into the mm tree, since 2.6 without it is now somewhat behind > 2.4.23. > > I understand that consolidated plain patches are preferred for the mm > tree.
They're easiest for me, but a bitkeeper pull is OK too.
> I assume that the actual pull into the release tree can still be > done using bk so that we can preserve the individual csets and their > comments?
Well.. If you have isolated patches which are confirmed to fix the problem then there is no benefit in staging these changes in -mm: just merge them up. It depends upon your confidence level, really.
- 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/
| |