> It sounds like your tree is out-of-date. Your patch to fix that went in
> days ago, applied by Linus directly:
Its purposefully not tracking every Linus update so I can build a
replicable environment. I missed the list mail it went in tho.
> I lean towards disabling it by default in 2.6.21 an
Alan Cox wrote:
I think it might be better to give up ACPI support in 2.6.21 and target
2.6.22. What do you think?
I removed it from my tree already so that I can actually use libata and
do real work. The "crash every non PCI controller" feature in the current
ACPI hacks means PCMCIA and ISAPn
> I think it might be better to give up ACPI support in 2.6.21 and target
> 2.6.22. What do you think?
I removed it from my tree already so that I can actually use libata and
do real work. The "crash every non PCI controller" feature in the current
ACPI hacks means PCMCIA and ISAPnP do not work a
Hello, all.
Currently, libata-acpi has the following problems.
1. Matching controller/device to ACPI node. It currently uses ap->cbl
== ATA_CBL_SATA test to choose between two formats - the traditional ATA
nodes with master/slave devices and new native SATA nodes. This is
incorrect as ata_piix
