Re: platform/x86/thinkpad_acpi: Adjustments for four function implementations

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

 



> If this was code that affected all systems, the impact would be greater
> - and it would be much easier to test.

I can follow such a view to some degree.
Would you dare to test the deletion of questionable error messages
more with any other software components?


> As it applies only to Thinkpad systems,

Are these models still popular enough in any areas?


> far fewer total systems are affected, and it is much harder to
> test/verify.

Do you care for the suggested transformation patterns (in principle)?


> If you feel that is the wrong call,

It seems that the usual indication was expressed for change resistance.


> you will need to present convincing evidence to Henrique that
> this is worth the risk.

Which risks have you got in mind for this small adjustment?


> … - or that it would be worth the effort.

Can a bit of “software fine-tuning” become useful also here?

Regards,
Markus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Development]     [Kernel Announce]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Linux Networking Development]     [Share Photos]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux