On Wednesday, September 24, 2008 5:33 pm Jiri Kosina wrote: > On Wed, 24 Sep 2008, Jesse Barnes wrote: > > That said, adding a check to the x86 code would be a good thing to do; > > I'll hack up a patch tomorrow unless someone beats me to it. > > The problem here is that what we desperately need first is a method to > restore the original EEPROM contents after it gets corrupted (David Airlie > has, sadly, apparently bricked his notebook while trying to do so). > Without this, we can put a lot of debugging/protecting patches into the > kernel, but we won't be able to succesfully verify anything, because > testing wouldn't be possible. > > Added Jesse and Karsten to CC, as they are working on such a tool right > now, as far as I know. I should be able to test the mmap fix independently of the e1000 breakage at least... lemme try it out now... -- Jesse Barnes, Intel Open Source Technology Center -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-testers" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
