Hi,
On Saturday, 30 June 2007 12:11, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > > > Sorry, but I can't resist the opportunity to say "Send a patch!" :)
> > > >
> > > > Seriously, though, I'd prefer not to. If we rename that acpi video flags
> > > > variable (I assume this is what you're thinking of), we only create cause for
> > > > confusion. A variable should for debugging or for controlling quirks, not for
> > > > both at the same time.
> > >
> > > Cause for confusion? We are currently using 2 bits of that variable,
> > > and we want to add one more bit. I seriously doubt that can confuse
> > > anyone.
> >
> > Well, indeed it would be more elegant to rename the existing flags variable
> > and use another bit out of it, but I personally don't think it's _that_
> > important. At least, I don't think we should block the patch
> > because of that.
>
> It is not _that_ important.
>
> > BTW, has anyone confirmed that it works on i386?
>
> If you have patch somewhere nearby, I can test it on i386 and make it
> use just one flags variable.
http://www.sisk.pl/kernel/hibernation_and_suspend/2.6.22-rc6/patches/28-Optional-Beeping-During-Resume-From-RAM.patch
Greetings,
Rafael
--
"Premature optimization is the root of all evil." - Donald Knuth
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
