Then feel free to reassign :)
For CONFIG_PREEMPT related things, the advice[1] seems to be : deal
with upstream directly. Upstream knows[2] about this, so I won't
bother the Kernel team with this unless they use CONFIG_PREEMPT=y ,
which won't be in the near future.
[1]
On ven, 2008-09-26 at 20:36 +0200, Alexandre Rossi wrote:
As a side note, shouldn't this be reassigned to the linux-source-*
(source packages as linux-image-* do not seem to be built with
CONFIG_PREEMPT enabled)?
Well, as CONFIG_PREMPT is not used, I don't think kernel team will do
On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 07:24:59AM +0200, Alexandre Rossi wrote:
Hi,
This has been bugging me for months. Thanks for the clues about the
roots of the problem. Could you please point me to a specific patch?
Is this fixed in 2.6.26.5?
I only use debian kernel so I'm not sure.
As a side
As a side note, shouldn't this be reassigned to the linux-source-*
(source packages as linux-image-* do not seem to be built with
CONFIG_PREEMPT enabled)?
Well, as CONFIG_PREMPT is not used, I don't think kernel team will do
anything about this. But you can try. I think you'd better report
As a side note, shouldn't this be reassigned to the linux-source-*
(source packages as linux-image-* do not seem to be built with
CONFIG_PREEMPT enabled)?
Well, as CONFIG_PREMPT is not used, I don't think kernel team will do
anything about this. But you can try. I think you'd better report
Hi,
This has been bugging me for months. Thanks for the clues about the
roots of the problem. Could you please point me to a specific patch?
Is this fixed in 2.6.26.5?
As a side note, shouldn't this be reassigned to the linux-source-*
(source packages as linux-image-* do not seem to be built
6 matches
Mail list logo
