Re: [RFC 00/15] ACPI graph support

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 7:20 PM, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
> On 06/10/16 18:05, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 4:20 PM, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>
> [..]
>
>>>
>>> While I agree with you, the argument which will be done and will win
>>> most of the time to upstream something is that "we have shipped the
>>> product with that table, we need to support it upstream...". I don't
>>> think even you disagree with that ;)
>>
>>
>> Well, maybe they should have talked to the upstream before shipping
>> the product with that table?  Failing to do so is like jumping to a
>> pool from a tower without checking how much water is there in it in
>> the first place ...
>>
>
> Really ? I admit that I like this response and your stance here and I
> definitely support it but I have seen quite a few cases which tells me
> otherwise.

Was I involved in any of those?

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



[Index of Archives]     [Linux IBM ACPI]     [Linux Power Management]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux Laptop]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Device Mapper]     [Linux Resources]

  Powered by Linux