On Tue, 22 May 2007, Matt Mackall wrote: > Whether the 'bug' is in the firmware or the kernel, it is the kernel > that has regressed. Suspend worked fine for 2+ years before this. That means something, but not that much. The kernel could have been doing broken things for two years in ACPI that happened to not trigger a bug in someone's firmware, for example. And when the kernel was fixed (to, e.g., do it right by the spec or unbreak other firmwares that did it by the spec) and that triggered the bug. We really need to find the cause of the regression to know. > Breaking working systems, either software or hardware, is a bad idea. We shouldn't do it for frivoulous reasons, of course. > I shouldn't have to upgrade my BIOS to work with a new kernel any more > than I should have to upgrade my browser. We don't agree there, as you are not talking about a stable kernel series. And btw, unless you hunt down someone that also has the bug and uses an up-to-date BIOS (or something else to give an extra data point that discards a possible firmware bug in your version of the BIOS), or bissect to pinpoint what caused the regression, this thread will go nowhere. -- "One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot Henrique Holschuh - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
