Re: [(repost) git Patch 1/1] avoid IRQ0 ioapic pin collision

On Tuesday 25 April 2006 21:53, Brown, Len wrote:
> I'd rather see the original irq-renaming patch
> and its subsequent multiple via workaround patches
> reverted than to further complicate what is becoming
> a fragile mess.

Sorry rechecking - i already got the patch now. You want me to drop it again?

I guess we could drop it all, but VIA must still work afterwards.
How would we do that?

-Andi
-
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/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [(repost) git Patch 1/1] avoid IRQ0 ioapic pin collision
    • From: "Kimball Murray" <[email protected]>

• References:
  • RE: [(repost) git Patch 1/1] avoid IRQ0 ioapic pin collision
    • From: "Brown, Len" <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] likely cleanup: remove unlikely for kfree(NULL)
• Next by Date: Re: Issues with sata_nv and 2 disks under 2.6.16 and 2.6.17-rc2
• Previous by thread: RE: [(repost) git Patch 1/1] avoid IRQ0 ioapic pin collision
• Next by thread: Re: [(repost) git Patch 1/1] avoid IRQ0 ioapic pin collision
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[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]