On Thu, 12 Nov 2009, Mike Travis wrote: > Also, I think in general that all the apic messages, unless they represent > "system boot progress" should be displayed only when asked for, like with > apic=debug or verbose? Something more like: > That's outside the scope of my patch. My patch does what the title says, it reduces srat verbosity in the kernel log. If an additional change would like to suppress that output with a kernel parameter, that's fine, but it's an additional change and not what I was addressing. When posting a patchset like this where all patches are related for a common goal and one patch (mine) was proposed during the development of the set, it's normal to include that patch in future postings with proper attribution given by indicating an author other than yourself in the very first line of the email: From: David Rientjes <rientjes@xxxxxxxxxx> and retaining your acked-by line, my signed-off-by line, and then adding your own signed-off-by line. If a subsequent patch were to suppress this for kernels not using a certain parameter, I certainly wouldn't object to it. -- 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
