On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 9:27 AM, Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 02:04:47PM -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: >> Which ones? These two? >> >> dcf6d294830d46b0e6901477fb4bf455281d90c8 - drm/i915: quirk away >> phantom LVDS on Intel's D525MW mainboard >> e5614f0c2d0f4d7f0b8ef745d34593baf2c5dbf8 - drm/i915: quirk away >> phantom LVDS on Intel's D510MO mainboard > > Yes. OK, will do. >> Please let me know if you see any other way. > > An alternative ugly hack would be to encode some metadata into the > search string. I am a bit wary of simply converting the DMI_EXACT_MATCH > back into DMI_MATCH because that introduces a regression into working > machines if we blithely backport fixes like the two above. I'd rather > have the compile failure. How about then just backporting like this then: #define DMI_EXACT_MATCH(a, b) DMI_MATCH(DMI_PRODUCT_NAME, "BACKPORT_IGNORE") It'd mean no #ifdef'ing code and at the same time making the run time of the code of the mentioned patches skip. Thoughts? Luis -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe backports" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
