From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dave Jones Subject: Re: [discuss] Linux 2.6.19-rc4: known unfixed regressions (v2) Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2006 12:49:28 -0500 Message-ID: <20061106174928.GB19283@redhat.com> References: <454AFD01.4080306@linux.intel.com> <20061103155656.GA1000@redhat.com> <200611051832.13285.christiand59@web.de> <20061105200448.GE859@redhat.com> <20061106173528.GQ5778@stusta.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20061106173528.GQ5778@stusta.de> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: cpufreq-bounces@lists.linux.org.uk Errors-To: cpufreq-bounces+glkc-cpufreq=gmane.org+glkc-cpufreq=gmane.org@lists.linux.org.uk Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Adrian Bunk Cc: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, cpufreq@lists.linux.org.uk, Christian , Linux Kernel Mailing List On Mon, Nov 06, 2006 at 06:35:28PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: > config X86_POWERNOW_K8 > tristate "AMD Opteron/Athlon64 PowerNow!" > select CPU_FREQ_TABLE > depends (ACPI_PROCESSOR || ACPI_PROCESSOR=n) > > But in the end, the best solution depends on how many percent of the > X86_POWERNOW_K8 users have Christian's problem of requiring > ACPI_PROCESSOR. If there are only very few people with this problem, I'd > say leave it as it is. Well, it's been this way for a while, and only recently this has come up. There was a similar report for powernow-k7, which has a similar construct. Dave -- http://www.codemonkey.org.uk