Hi. On Wed, 2007-06-13 at 10:24 +0200, Pavel Machek wrote: > Hi! > > > > > Wouldn't it be much more useful if it was unconditionally compiled in > > > > and controlled instead by a sysfs entry? That way it will be far more > > > > useful to $user who doesn't know or want to know how to compile and > > > > install a kernel, but wants to do what they can to get provide helpful > > > > debugging info and perhaps even get it going. > > > > > > I like this idea. > > > > > > > Yes, Pavel, I'll supply a patch if you (plural) agree. > > > > > > I agree. :-) > > > > Ok. I'll take Pavel's silence as agreement too. I'll be a little slow > > (as usual, nowadays!), but will try to get it done next week. I think I > > can in clear conscience do it on Redhat time if I don't manage it > > beforehand. > > Well, everyone wants it so what can I do... Stefan basically posted 3 > liner to do that, and that one will probably work... so just test it.
As he admitted, it's a quick and dirty hack. I'd like to try something nicer. > Oh, and please keep the macro, so it can be moved around .S file for > finding out where it crashes. Are there other points you'd like to nominate? It would defeat the logic for implementing a nice interface if you still have to recompile your kernel to test beeping in another place. Regards, Nigel
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part