On Mon, 12 Sep 2011 10:13:29 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: > On Mon, 2011-09-12 at 12:18 -0400, Jean Delvare wrote: > > Hi Guenter, Durgadoss, > > > > Sorry for the very late comment. > > > > On Wed, 13 Jul 2011 13:48:11 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: > > > Looks like it is working now, so I applied the patch to -next. > > > > Working, really? That's not how it looks like from here. > > > Frankly, I don't remember how I tested it - though I remember that I > did. I re-tested it on a Xeon C5528 and got the same results :(. Maybe I > was mentally unstable at the time or something. Sorry for that - should > not happen. > > Question is what to do - back it out ? I don't have time to look into it > more right now. I'll send a patch for the most obvious bug. For the rest, I'd like to hear Durgadoss before we decide what do to. Certainly he had a good reason for posting the patch in the first place, let's avoid a bold revert if possible. -- Jean Delvare _______________________________________________ lm-sensors mailing list lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
