On Wed, 3 Sep 2008, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:

> On Wed, Sep 03, 2008 at 01:50:35PM +0200, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> > On Tue, 2 Sep 2008, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > 
> > > I guess we could use System's product name to differentiate between 
> > > Cristopher's and Daniel's boards. Although I must admit it is the very 
> > > first time when I see a box that behaves better with active mux. DOes 
> > > Vista use active mux nowadays? Because if it is not then I bet there is 
> > > (or shortly will be) a BIOS update fixing legacy mode on Daniel's box.
> > 
> > I guess so, yes.
> > 
> > On the other hand, this might also be viewed as regression (we made 
> > Daniel's hardware behave worse with recent kernel than it did before), so 
> > I think we still would like to have this fixed. What about the patch 
> > below, adding the match on System's product name, as you suggested? 
> > Thanks.
> > 
> 
> I agree. Daniel, could you please try the patch to make sure it
> restores the previous behavior for you and I will push it through.
> 
> Thanks!

I'll test that Thursday as well; is there some quick way to determine 
whether you're using active mux or not?

	-Daniel
*This .sig left intentionally blank*