On Mon, 2006-03-06 at 13:17 -0500, Dave Jones wrote: > I (and Darrick) already agreed further up in this thread that it wasn't needed. > I think we're actually in agreement ;) Yep. Maybe it's time I cough up a patch that does this. :) --D
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
- 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]>
- Re: [PATCH] leave APIC code inactive by default on i386
- From: Pavel Machek <[email protected]>
- 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
- From: Pavel Machek <[email protected]>
- 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
- From: Pavel Machek <[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: [PATCH 2/6] IB: match connection requests based on private data
- Next by Date: Re: problems with scsi_transport_fc and qla2xxx
- Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] leave APIC code inactive by default on i386
- Next by thread: [git patches] ocfs2 updates
- Index(es):
 |