http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12826 ------- Comment #29 from trenn@xxxxxxx 2009-03-09 05:43 ------- > Should I move and rename the bug? The 32 vs 64 bit is a duplicate of this one: [Bug 8246] 32/64X address mismatch in "Gpe0Block" - IBM Thinkpad R51e It is set to resolved because a boot param was added, which is IMO not sufficient. But it's hard to convince Len to add dmi blacklists... You might then want to recheck about: > i.e. I cannot move pointer, change VT nor even ping the system or other bugs which might be a follow ups, but are more likely independent. You want to open new bugs for unrelated things. > Should I move and rename the bug? Hmm, the bug is valid IMO, I'd keep it open. As long as the p4-clockmod is a cpufreq driver and not explicitly stated broken or tainting the kernel (and even then) it must provide sysfs cpufreq interface userspace programs rely on, like every other cpufreq driver does. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe cpufreq" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
