On 11/16/17, Jani Nikula <jani.nik...@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Nov 2017, Tuncer Ayaz <tuncer.a...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I don't follow why you think it's a different platform and how I
> > might have "more" definitely shown v4.1 to be good, but I
On 11/16/17, Jani Nikula wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Nov 2017, Tuncer Ayaz wrote:
> > I don't follow why you think it's a different platform and how I
> > might have "more" definitely shown v4.1 to be good, but I'll trust
> > your judgement as a drm dev and not argue :)
On 11/15/17, Jani Nikula wrote:
> The freedesktop.org bugs you reference are for rather different
> platforms than yours. There's nothing there to indicate v4.1 being
> the last known good kernel like for you. There is no exact same
> report.
I don't follow why you
On 11/15/17, Jani Nikula wrote:
> The freedesktop.org bugs you reference are for rather different
> platforms than yours. There's nothing there to indicate v4.1 being
> the last known good kernel like for you. There is no exact same
> report.
I don't follow why you think it's a different
On 11/14/17, Jani Nikula wrote:
>
> Tuncer, where's your bug report? Can't find one. Please file your
> bug at the fdo bugzilla.
I'm sorry if this wasn't clear.
I didn't file a bug report since others have already done so,
reporting the same symptoms. I did sign up
On 11/14/17, Jani Nikula wrote:
>
> Tuncer, where's your bug report? Can't find one. Please file your
> bug at the fdo bugzilla.
I'm sorry if this wasn't clear.
I didn't file a bug report since others have already done so,
reporting the same symptoms. I did sign up yesterday to confirm this
in
On 6/4/07, Tim Bird <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Greg KH wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 12:10:01PM -0700, Tim Bird wrote:
>> Greg,
>>
>> I'm having problems cloning the stable git tree for 2.6.21.
>> Here's what I get:
>>
>> $ git clone
On 6/4/07, Tim Bird [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Greg KH wrote:
On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 12:10:01PM -0700, Tim Bird wrote:
Greg,
I'm having problems cloning the stable git tree for 2.6.21.
Here's what I get:
$ git clone
http://www.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-2.6.21.y.git
On 6/1/07, Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Tuncer Ayaz wrote:
> I'm still seeing the libata warning that disks were not spun down
> properly on the following two setups and am wondering whether I need
> a new shutdown binary or the changeset mentioned below is not meant
&g
I'm still seeing the libata warning that disks were not spun down
properly on the following two setups and am wondering whether I need
a new shutdown binary or the changeset mentioned below is not meant
to fix what I'm triggering by halt'ing.
If it's not a bug I will try to update my shutdown
I'm still seeing the libata warning that disks were not spun down
properly on the following two setups and am wondering whether I need
a new shutdown binary or the changeset mentioned below is not meant
to fix what I'm triggering by halt'ing.
If it's not a bug I will try to update my shutdown
On 6/1/07, Jeff Garzik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tuncer Ayaz wrote:
I'm still seeing the libata warning that disks were not spun down
properly on the following two setups and am wondering whether I need
a new shutdown binary or the changeset mentioned below is not meant
to fix what I'm
On 4/25/07, Tuncer Ayaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 4/25/07, Cestonaro, Thilo (external)
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hey,
>
> > CONFIG_HIGHMEM64G=y
> > CONFIG_HIGHMEM=y
> > CONFIG_X86_PAE=y
>
> Ok in highmem it's active, whats about lowmem?
> x8
On 4/25/07, Cestonaro, Thilo (external)
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hey,
> CONFIG_HIGHMEM64G=y
> CONFIG_HIGHMEM=y
> CONFIG_X86_PAE=y
Ok in highmem it's active, whats about lowmem?
x86-64 is NX active for lowmem too AFAIK.
It's more of an issue of having PAE enabled.
Without PAE you are not
On 4/25/07, Cestonaro, Thilo (external)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hey,
CONFIG_HIGHMEM64G=y
CONFIG_HIGHMEM=y
CONFIG_X86_PAE=y
Ok in highmem it's active, whats about lowmem?
x86-64 is NX active for lowmem too AFAIK.
It's more of an issue of having PAE enabled.
Without PAE you are not able to
On 4/25/07, Tuncer Ayaz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 4/25/07, Cestonaro, Thilo (external)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hey,
CONFIG_HIGHMEM64G=y
CONFIG_HIGHMEM=y
CONFIG_X86_PAE=y
Ok in highmem it's active, whats about lowmem?
x86-64 is NX active for lowmem too AFAIK.
It's more of an issue
On 4/24/07, William Heimbigner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tue, 24 Apr 2007, Cestonaro, Thilo (external) wrote:
> Hey,
>
> is it right, that the NX Bit is not used under i386-Arch but
> under x86_64-Arch?
> When yes, is there a special argument for it not to be used?
>
> Ciao Thilo
I don't
On 4/24/07, William Heimbigner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 24 Apr 2007, Cestonaro, Thilo (external) wrote:
Hey,
is it right, that the NX Bit is not used under i386-Arch but
under x86_64-Arch?
When yes, is there a special argument for it not to be used?
Ciao Thilo
I don't think so -
I am not subscribed to this list.
I got the really oold ISA original Sound Blaster 16 and got the following
Oops when running aumix:
Sep 23 12:43:46 flarp kernel: eax: 0001 ebx: cfaa4400 ecx:
edx: e8515510
Sep 23 12:43:46 flarp kernel: esi: ccce0dc0 edi: ebp:
I am not subscribed to this list.
I got the really oold ISA original Sound Blaster 16 and got the following
Oops when running aumix:
Sep 23 12:43:46 flarp kernel: eax: 0001 ebx: cfaa4400 ecx:
edx: e8515510
Sep 23 12:43:46 flarp kernel: esi: ccce0dc0 edi: ebp:
20 matches
Mail list logo