On Fri, Apr 06, 2007 at 06:32:28PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 05 Apr 2007 23:36:47 +0200 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
> > 0009-add-sonypi-compat-code.patch
> > compatibility code to allow old sonypi bound userspace apps to still
> > work
>
> I never received a copy of the ninth patc
On Sat, Apr 07, 2007 at 04:17:24PM +0200, Mattia Dongili wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 06, 2007 at 06:32:28PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Thu, 05 Apr 2007 23:36:47 +0200 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> ...
> > > 0009-add-sonypi-compat-code.patch
> > > compatibility code to allow old sonypi bound userspa
On Sat, 7 Apr 2007 17:03:38 +0200 Mattia Dongili <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 07, 2007 at 04:17:24PM +0200, Mattia Dongili wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 06, 2007 at 06:32:28PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > On Thu, 05 Apr 2007 23:36:47 +0200 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > ...
> > > > 0009-ad
On Friday 06 April 2007 10:01 pm, Greg KH wrote:
> Are you _sure_ you have a 1-to-1 relationship here? No multiple devices
> pointing to the same acpi node? Or the other way around? If so, you
> are going to have to change the name to be something more unique.
I've wondered that too. The shor
"Andika Triwidada" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[cc linux-acpi]
> Question: is that normal? I thought power consumption will be
> automatically reduced if one core offlined.
The current cpu offline essentially just runs a special idle loop.
The standard idle loop is even a bit more aggressive on
