Len Brown wrote: > Ingo pointed out that automated testing wasn't finding > ACPI exceptions because we were not using the standard > Linux format for oops etc. Sounds more like a case of more the automated testing needing fixing than the kernel. I'll just remove it. > I put this hack patch on the debug-test branch in the acpi tree, > and pulled it into the test branch for linux-next to mine > for previously ignored errors. > > This commit isn't intended for 2.6.27. > (and thus is not on the release-2.6.27 branch) > hopefully that isn't abuse of linux-next... > > Arjan tells me that we'll have a real WARN() > with prink semantics in 2.6.27 and so we can > simplify/standardize this when that happens. > > Oh, and since I'm on sabbatical, I'm obviously > fine with whatever Andi Kleen does (or does not do here) > in my absence. Thanks for the clarification, Len. I was already puzzling why that was changed. And no need to watch your email that closely... -Andi -- 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
