On Thursday, 26 of June 2008, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Thursday, 26 of June 2008, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > > > * Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > Len seems to think that Rafael seems to think that Ingo seems to think > > > > that this patch broke one of his boxes. > > > > > > > > Is it so? > > > > > > No! :-) > > > > > > it found a pre-existing suspend+resume breakage on a testbox. (I.e. > > > the debug patch worked as i'd expect it to work. Every good debug > > > patch starts its lifetime with a sharp spike of breakages it finds.) > > > > Does it mean that the $subject patch doesn't break your test box after > > all? > > it doesnt break it - i get the same suspend+resume breakage without that > patch as well, if i do it manually. Okay, so I think the $subject patch is good to go, then. Thanks, Rafael -- 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
