On Tue, 2006-02-28 at 23:33 -0500, Dave Jones wrote: > It's still being kicked around. I saw one patch off-list earlier this > week that has some small improvements over the variant originally posted, > but still had 1-2 kinks. Hm... what kinks are you referring to? Anything you want me to look at? --D
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH] leave APIC code inactive by default on i386
- From: Dave Jones <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] leave APIC code inactive by default on i386
- References:
- [PATCH] leave APIC code inactive by default on i386
- From: "Darrick J. Wong" <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] leave APIC code inactive by default on i386
- From: "Michael Ellerman" <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] leave APIC code inactive by default on i386
- From: Dave Jones <[email protected]>
- [PATCH] leave APIC code inactive by default on i386
- Prev by Date: BUG: 2.6.16-rc5 does not boot on Intel Core Duo
- Next by Date: Re: + proc-dont-lock-task_structs-indefinitely-cpuset-fix-2.patch added to -mm tree
- Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] leave APIC code inactive by default on i386
- Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] leave APIC code inactive by default on i386
- Index(es):
 |