On Thu, 29 Sep 2011 20:33:56 -0700, Greg KH <greg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Are these really all -stable material? I think just the sequence that actually makes the machine work; the scarier patches are those which reduce the mode setting time from 5-10s down to .7s. Is this stretching the bounds of what is acceptable for -stable? Would it look better as a single patch, instead of 14 separate ones? > I'm all for enabling new hardware like this, and overall, the patches > aren't that bad, just want to verify this. Let me know what you think; they'll be queued for 3.2 once they've gotten review and (I hope) more testing. It's Jesse's fault there are so many little patches; he asked me to split things up into separate functional changes. It's either that, or I'm just looking to increase the number of patches I have in the kernel. > And, I do have to tell you, "curses, now I have no excuse to not buy > that laptop!" I'd rather have a 'regular' PC; getting Debian installed on this machine was no picnic. But, I haven't seen anything else in this form factor that includes a display port connector. -- keith.packard@xxxxxxxxx
Attachment:
pgpY8zEFSSpWN.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
