On 12/20/2009 02:12 PM, Ben Hutchings wrote:
Only some drivers (and none before kernel version 2.6.31) currently
set these flags. When the flags are equal to 0 and so we don't know
what the link partner advertised, don't report anything.
Signed-off-by: Ben Hutchingsb...@decadent.org.uk
---
Erik Slagter wrote:
On Fri, 2005-08-26 at 13:36 +0900, Horms wrote:
#undef ATA_ENABLE_ATAPI /* define to enable ATAPI support */
#undef ATA_ENABLE_PATA /* define to enable PATA support in some
These two would very interesting to me to be included in Kconfig.
Neither of
Horms wrote:
Hi Jeff, Hi All,
In the cause of debuging a problem with a DVD burner[1]
Brett Smith brought to my attention that there are several
variables in ./include/linux/libata.h, that when changed
from #undef to #define, enable features in the ATA subsystem.
Is there any interest in a
Eric W. Biederman wrote:
Arjan van de Ven [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, 2005-04-05 at 11:11 +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Tue, Apr 05, 2005 at 09:49:25AM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
I don't think you did get a rejection, a few people said that _they_
weren't going to do it, but if you
Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Tue, Apr 05, 2005 at 11:28:07AM +0200, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
One of the sticking points will be how people get the firmware; I can
see the point of a kernel-distributable-firmware project related to the
kernel (say on kernel.org) which would provide a nice collection
Humberto Massa wrote:
But, the question made here was a subtler one and you are all biting
around the bush: there *are* some misrepresentations of licenses to the
firmware blobs in the kernel (-- ok, *if* you consider that hex dumps
are not source code). What Sven asked was: Hey, can I state
Matthew Wilcox wrote:
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 10:51:30AM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
Then let's see some acts. We (lkml) are not the ones with the percieved
problem, or the ones discussing it.
Actually, there are some legitimate problems with some of the files in
the Linux source base. Last time this
Clint Adams wrote:
[PATCH 8/14 linux-2.6.7-rc1] prism54: Fix prism54.org bugs 39, 73
I'm considering rejecting the entire series because of this obfuscation
of changes, and getting you to resend with the whitespace crapola
separated out.
Please at least apply the changes in the 8/14 patch,
Andrew Morton wrote:
Jeff Garzik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Luis, you, or somebody should create a new patch series with just the
critical fixes, NO WHITESPACE/FORMATTING CHANGES mixed in, and send
those first.
Whitespace changes are often nice, but they should be the very first
patch[es
9 matches
Mail list logo
