* Bitfield usage in FADT table?
@ 2003-11-11 16:15 maxime bizon
[not found] ` <20031111161527.GC23128-AroONJ29hSVWj0EZb7rXcA@public.gmane.org>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: maxime bizon @ 2003-11-11 16:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: acpi-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f
Hello,
I'm using kernel 2.6.0-test9 on a i386 notebook.
I forced a new FADT table in the kernel and put the following bytes at
offset 0x70: 0xf1 0xa2 0x35 0x78.
Then I made some printk at kernel init and here is the output:
begin dump of fadt:
[...]
6e 0
6f 0
70 f1
71 a2
72 35
73 78
74 0
75 0
[...]
bit wb_invd is 1
bit wb_invd_flush is 0
bit proc_c1 is 0
bit plvl2_up is 0
bit pwr_button is 1
bit sleep_button is 1
bit fixed_rTC is 1
bit rtcs4 is 1
bit tmr_val_ext is 0
bit dock_cap is 1
bit reset_reg_sup is 0
bit sealed_case is 0
bit headless is 0
bit cpu_sw_sleep is 1
gcc-2.95 and gcc-3.3 give the same thing.
Is it really what it is supposed to be?
--
Maxime
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email sponsored by: ApacheCon 2003,
16-19 November in Las Vegas. Learn firsthand the latest
developments in Apache, PHP, Perl, XML, Java, MySQL,
WebDAV, and more! http://www.apachecon.com/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Bitfield usage in FADT table?
[not found] ` <20031111161527.GC23128-AroONJ29hSVWj0EZb7rXcA@public.gmane.org>
@ 2003-11-11 17:02 ` Ducrot Bruno
[not found] ` <20031111170245.GE29175-kk6yZipjEM5g9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org>
2003-11-11 17:23 ` Randy.Dunlap
1 sibling, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Ducrot Bruno @ 2003-11-11 17:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: maxime bizon; +Cc: acpi-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f
On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 05:15:28PM +0100, maxime bizon wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I'm using kernel 2.6.0-test9 on a i386 notebook.
>
> I forced a new FADT table in the kernel and put the following bytes at
> offset 0x70: 0xf1 0xa2 0x35 0x78.
>
> Then I made some printk at kernel init and here is the output:
>
> begin dump of fadt:
> [...]
> 6e 0
> 6f 0
> 70 f1
> 71 a2
> 72 35
> 73 78
> 74 0
> 75 0
> [...]
> bit wb_invd is 1
> bit wb_invd_flush is 0
> bit proc_c1 is 0
> bit plvl2_up is 0
> bit pwr_button is 1
> bit sleep_button is 1
> bit fixed_rTC is 1
> bit rtcs4 is 1
> bit tmr_val_ext is 0
> bit dock_cap is 1
> bit reset_reg_sup is 0
> bit sealed_case is 0
> bit headless is 0
> bit cpu_sw_sleep is 1
>
> gcc-2.95 and gcc-3.3 give the same thing.
>
>
> Is it really what it is supposed to be?
To be what? What you want to do, exactly?
--
Ducrot Bruno
-- Which is worse: ignorance or apathy?
-- Don't know. Don't care.
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email sponsored by: ApacheCon 2003,
16-19 November in Las Vegas. Learn firsthand the latest
developments in Apache, PHP, Perl, XML, Java, MySQL,
WebDAV, and more! http://www.apachecon.com/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Bitfield usage in FADT table?
[not found] ` <20031111170245.GE29175-kk6yZipjEM5g9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org>
@ 2003-11-11 17:18 ` maximE bizon
[not found] ` <20031111171845.GA19024-llVo0kcOI43s6UcQ8r3GPg@public.gmane.org>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: maximE bizon @ 2003-11-11 17:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ducrot Bruno; +Cc: acpi-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f
On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 06:02:45PM +0100, Ducrot Bruno wrote:
> > begin dump of fadt:
> > [...]
> > 6e 0
> > 6f 0
> > 70 f1
> > 71 a2
> > 72 35
> > 73 78
> > 74 0
> > 75 0
> > [...]
> > bit wb_invd is 1
> > bit wb_invd_flush is 0
> > bit proc_c1 is 0
> > bit plvl2_up is 0
> > bit pwr_button is 1
> > bit sleep_button is 1
> > bit fixed_rTC is 1
> > bit rtcs4 is 1
> > bit tmr_val_ext is 0
> > bit dock_cap is 1
> > bit reset_reg_sup is 0
> > bit sealed_case is 0
> > bit headless is 0
> > bit cpu_sw_sleep is 1
> >
> > Is it really what it is supposed to be?
>
> To be what?
According to the ACPI specs:
value bit offset
===== ==========
wb_invd 0
wb_invd_flush 1
proc_c1 2
plvl2_up 3
pwr_button 4
sleep_button 5
[...]
So, for instance, sleep_button should be 0, no ?
--
Maxime
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email sponsored by: ApacheCon 2003,
16-19 November in Las Vegas. Learn firsthand the latest
developments in Apache, PHP, Perl, XML, Java, MySQL,
WebDAV, and more! http://www.apachecon.com/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Bitfield usage in FADT table?
[not found] ` <20031111161527.GC23128-AroONJ29hSVWj0EZb7rXcA@public.gmane.org>
2003-11-11 17:02 ` Ducrot Bruno
@ 2003-11-11 17:23 ` Randy.Dunlap
[not found] ` <20031111092316.124cdfa0.rddunlap-3NddpPZAyC0@public.gmane.org>
1 sibling, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Randy.Dunlap @ 2003-11-11 17:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: maxime bizon; +Cc: acpi-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f
On Tue, 11 Nov 2003 17:15:28 +0100 maxime bizon <maxime.bizon-ZrNlpQwM5lQ@public.gmane.org> wrote:
|
| Hello,
|
| I'm using kernel 2.6.0-test9 on a i386 notebook.
|
| I forced a new FADT table in the kernel and put the following bytes at
| offset 0x70: 0xf1 0xa2 0x35 0x78.
|
| Then I made some printk at kernel init and here is the output:
|
| begin dump of fadt:
| [...]
| 6e 0
| 6f 0
| 70 f1
| 71 a2
| 72 35
| 73 78
| 74 0
| 75 0
| [...]
| bit wb_invd is 1
| bit wb_invd_flush is 0
| bit proc_c1 is 0
| bit plvl2_up is 0
| bit pwr_button is 1
| bit sleep_button is 1
| bit fixed_rTC is 1
| bit rtcs4 is 1
| bit tmr_val_ext is 0
| bit dock_cap is 1
| bit reset_reg_sup is 0
| bit sealed_case is 0
| bit headless is 0
| bit cpu_sw_sleep is 1
|
| gcc-2.95 and gcc-3.3 give the same thing.
|
| Is it really what it is supposed to be?
It can be confusing, can't it?
Yes, I think that they are correct.
Look at the bit field as a u32: it's value is 0x7835a2f1.
Now look at the bit numbers in that u32 value and assign bit field
names to them and it will match your list above.
--
~Randy
MOTD: Always include version info.
simple bitfields program output:
[rddunlap-GKM3wtwTCu0@public.gmane.org src]$ ./bitfields
bits as u32 = 0x7835a2f1
bytes (hex): f1 a2 35 78
individual bits:
wb_invd: 1
wb_invd_flush: 0
proc_c1: 0
plvl2_up: 0
pwr_button: 1
sleep_button: 1
fixed_rTC: 1
rtcs4: 1
tmr_val_ext: 0
dock_cap: 1
reset_reg_sup: 0
sealed_case: 0
headless: 0
cpu_sw_sleep: 1
reserved6: 0x1e0d6
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email sponsored by: ApacheCon 2003,
16-19 November in Las Vegas. Learn firsthand the latest
developments in Apache, PHP, Perl, XML, Java, MySQL,
WebDAV, and more! http://www.apachecon.com/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Bitfield usage in FADT table?
[not found] ` <20031111092316.124cdfa0.rddunlap-3NddpPZAyC0@public.gmane.org>
@ 2003-11-11 17:48 ` maximE bizon
0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: maximE bizon @ 2003-11-11 17:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Randy.Dunlap; +Cc: acpi-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f
On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 09:23:16AM -0800, Randy.Dunlap wrote:
> It can be confusing, can't it?
>
> Yes, I think that they are correct.
> Look at the bit field as a u32: it's value is 0x7835a2f1.
>
> Now look at the bit numbers in that u32 value and assign bit field
> names to them and it will match your list above.
Yes, my mistake.
Thanks.
--
Maxime
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email sponsored by: ApacheCon 2003,
16-19 November in Las Vegas. Learn firsthand the latest
developments in Apache, PHP, Perl, XML, Java, MySQL,
WebDAV, and more! http://www.apachecon.com/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Bitfield usage in FADT table?
[not found] ` <20031111171845.GA19024-llVo0kcOI43s6UcQ8r3GPg@public.gmane.org>
@ 2003-11-11 17:55 ` Ducrot Bruno
2003-11-11 17:57 ` Ducrot Bruno
1 sibling, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: Ducrot Bruno @ 2003-11-11 17:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: max-ZrNlpQwM5lQ; +Cc: acpi-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f
On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 06:18:45PM +0100, maximE bizon wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 06:02:45PM +0100, Ducrot Bruno wrote:
>
> > > begin dump of fadt:
> > > [...]
> > > 6e 0
> > > 6f 0
> > > 70 f1
> > > 71 a2
> > > 72 35
> > > 73 78
> > > 74 0
> > > 75 0
> > > [...]
> > > bit wb_invd is 1
> > > bit wb_invd_flush is 0
> > > bit proc_c1 is 0
> > > bit plvl2_up is 0
> > > bit pwr_button is 1
> > > bit sleep_button is 1
> > > bit fixed_rTC is 1
> > > bit rtcs4 is 1
> > > bit tmr_val_ext is 0
> > > bit dock_cap is 1
> > > bit reset_reg_sup is 0
> > > bit sealed_case is 0
> > > bit headless is 0
> > > bit cpu_sw_sleep is 1
> > >
>
> > > Is it really what it is supposed to be?
> >
> > To be what?
>
> According to the ACPI specs:
>
> value bit offset
> ===== ==========
> wb_invd 0
> wb_invd_flush 1
> proc_c1 2
> plvl2_up 3
> pwr_button 4
> sleep_button 5
> [...]
>
> So, for instance, sleep_button should be 0, no ?
No. This is a double word, so, with endianess issues, you
actually have overwriten with
0x7825a2f1
and bit 5 of 0x7825a2f1 is 1.
--
Ducrot Bruno
-- Which is worse: ignorance or apathy?
-- Don't know. Don't care.
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email sponsored by: ApacheCon 2003,
16-19 November in Las Vegas. Learn firsthand the latest
developments in Apache, PHP, Perl, XML, Java, MySQL,
WebDAV, and more! http://www.apachecon.com/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Bitfield usage in FADT table?
[not found] ` <20031111171845.GA19024-llVo0kcOI43s6UcQ8r3GPg@public.gmane.org>
2003-11-11 17:55 ` Ducrot Bruno
@ 2003-11-11 17:57 ` Ducrot Bruno
[not found] ` <20031111175730.GG29175-kk6yZipjEM5g9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org>
1 sibling, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Ducrot Bruno @ 2003-11-11 17:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: max-ZrNlpQwM5lQ; +Cc: acpi-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f
On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 06:18:45PM +0100, maximE bizon wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 06:02:45PM +0100, Ducrot Bruno wrote:
>
> > > begin dump of fadt:
> > > [...]
> > > 6e 0
> > > 6f 0
> > > 70 f1
> > > 71 a2
> > > 72 35
> > > 73 78
> > > 74 0
> > > 75 0
> > > [...]
You also forgot to answer to my second question:
What you want to do, exactly?
--
Ducrot Bruno
-- Which is worse: ignorance or apathy?
-- Don't know. Don't care.
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email sponsored by: ApacheCon 2003,
16-19 November in Las Vegas. Learn firsthand the latest
developments in Apache, PHP, Perl, XML, Java, MySQL,
WebDAV, and more! http://www.apachecon.com/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Bitfield usage in FADT table?
[not found] ` <20031111175730.GG29175-kk6yZipjEM5g9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org>
@ 2003-11-11 18:25 ` maximE bizon
[not found] ` <20031111182522.GA19215-llVo0kcOI43s6UcQ8r3GPg@public.gmane.org>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: maximE bizon @ 2003-11-11 18:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ducrot Bruno; +Cc: acpi-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f
On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 06:57:30PM +0100, Ducrot Bruno wrote:
> You also forgot to answer to my second question:
>
> What you want to do, exactly?
I own a Latitude X200 notebook, with kernel 2.6.0-test9 installed, and
S3 doesn't work. It was posted here a few days ago. S3 does suspend
the computer but it is impossible to turn it on again.
I noticed that my power button is detected as a FF because FADT
pwr_button flag is not set, though the DSDT defines one.
I suspected the S3 problem to come from this, so I tried to correct my
FADT, but I forgot that the bitfield was on u32...
Now with the correct fix, I can see an acpi event when I press the
power button, but the system still won't come up after an S3.
Any idea ?
--
Maxime
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email sponsored by: ApacheCon 2003,
16-19 November in Las Vegas. Learn firsthand the latest
developments in Apache, PHP, Perl, XML, Java, MySQL,
WebDAV, and more! http://www.apachecon.com/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Bitfield usage in FADT table?
[not found] ` <20031111182522.GA19215-llVo0kcOI43s6UcQ8r3GPg@public.gmane.org>
@ 2003-11-11 18:57 ` Ducrot Bruno
[not found] ` <20031111185717.GH29175-kk6yZipjEM5g9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Ducrot Bruno @ 2003-11-11 18:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: max-ZrNlpQwM5lQ; +Cc: acpi-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f
On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 07:25:22PM +0100, maximE bizon wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 06:57:30PM +0100, Ducrot Bruno wrote:
>
> > You also forgot to answer to my second question:
> >
> > What you want to do, exactly?
>
> I own a Latitude X200 notebook, with kernel 2.6.0-test9 installed, and
> S3 doesn't work. It was posted here a few days ago. S3 does suspend
> the computer but it is impossible to turn it on again.
S3 seems to be broken in that kernel, anyway.
> I noticed that my power button is detected as a FF because FADT
> pwr_button flag is not set, though the DSDT defines one.
>
> I suspected the S3 problem to come from this, so I tried to correct my
> FADT, but I forgot that the bitfield was on u32...
Why not just hacking the source, instead of overwritten the FADT, for
only one flag?
>
> Now with the correct fix, I can see an acpi event when I press the
> power button, but the system still won't come up after an S3.
>
> Any idea ?
>
perhaps you can try a latest mm serie?
Cheers,
--
Ducrot Bruno
-- Which is worse: ignorance or apathy?
-- Don't know. Don't care.
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email sponsored by: ApacheCon 2003,
16-19 November in Las Vegas. Learn firsthand the latest
developments in Apache, PHP, Perl, XML, Java, MySQL,
WebDAV, and more! http://www.apachecon.com/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Bitfield usage in FADT table?
[not found] ` <20031111185717.GH29175-kk6yZipjEM5g9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org>
@ 2003-11-11 20:26 ` maxime bizon
[not found] ` <20031111202613.GA25458-AroONJ29hSVWj0EZb7rXcA@public.gmane.org>
2003-11-12 0:15 ` Karol Kozimor
1 sibling, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: maxime bizon @ 2003-11-11 20:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ducrot Bruno; +Cc: acpi-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f
On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 07:57:17PM +0100, Ducrot Bruno wrote:
> S3 seems to be broken in that kernel, anyway.
I tried every release since 2.5.70.
> Why not just hacking the source, instead of overwritten the FADT,
> for only one flag?
Had it worked, it would have been more convenient to provide a patched
FADT to other X200 users.
> perhaps you can try a latest mm serie?
I just tried, that doesn't change anything.
--
Maxime
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email sponsored by: ApacheCon 2003,
16-19 November in Las Vegas. Learn firsthand the latest
developments in Apache, PHP, Perl, XML, Java, MySQL,
WebDAV, and more! http://www.apachecon.com/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Bitfield usage in FADT table?
[not found] ` <20031111202613.GA25458-AroONJ29hSVWj0EZb7rXcA@public.gmane.org>
@ 2003-11-11 20:34 ` Ducrot Bruno
[not found] ` <20031111203433.GN29175-kk6yZipjEM5g9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Ducrot Bruno @ 2003-11-11 20:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: maxime bizon; +Cc: acpi-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f
On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 09:26:13PM +0100, maxime bizon wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 07:57:17PM +0100, Ducrot Bruno wrote:
>
> > S3 seems to be broken in that kernel, anyway.
>
> I tried every release since 2.5.70.
>
Ahem, I got success with 2.5.7x, or so.
I think also that I got success with 2.6.0-testX, but I don't remember
when it broke (should be for X=5 IIRC) even without the 'faulty' drivers.
--
Ducrot Bruno
-- Which is worse: ignorance or apathy?
-- Don't know. Don't care.
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email sponsored by: ApacheCon 2003,
16-19 November in Las Vegas. Learn firsthand the latest
developments in Apache, PHP, Perl, XML, Java, MySQL,
WebDAV, and more! http://www.apachecon.com/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Bitfield usage in FADT table?
[not found] ` <20031111203433.GN29175-kk6yZipjEM5g9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org>
@ 2003-11-11 20:46 ` maximE bizon
[not found] ` <20031111204627.GA26007-AroONJ29hSVWj0EZb7rXcA@public.gmane.org>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: maximE bizon @ 2003-11-11 20:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ducrot Bruno; +Cc: acpi-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f
On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 09:34:33PM +0100, Ducrot Bruno wrote:
> Ahem, I got success with 2.5.7x, or so.
>
> I think also that I got success with 2.6.0-testX, but I don't remember
> when it broke (should be for X=5 IIRC) even without the 'faulty' drivers.
Did it work for an X200 or for another laptop?
--
Maxime
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email sponsored by: ApacheCon 2003,
16-19 November in Las Vegas. Learn firsthand the latest
developments in Apache, PHP, Perl, XML, Java, MySQL,
WebDAV, and more! http://www.apachecon.com/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Bitfield usage in FADT table?
[not found] ` <20031111204627.GA26007-AroONJ29hSVWj0EZb7rXcA@public.gmane.org>
@ 2003-11-11 20:47 ` Ducrot Bruno
0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: Ducrot Bruno @ 2003-11-11 20:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: max-ZrNlpQwM5lQ; +Cc: acpi-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f
On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 09:46:27PM +0100, maximE bizon wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 09:34:33PM +0100, Ducrot Bruno wrote:
>
> > Ahem, I got success with 2.5.7x, or so.
> >
> > I think also that I got success with 2.6.0-testX, but I don't remember
> > when it broke (should be for X=5 IIRC) even without the 'faulty' drivers.
>
> Did it work for an X200 or for another laptop?
>
For another laptop. Well, I supposed you had understood. Sorry for
confusion.
--
Ducrot Bruno
-- Which is worse: ignorance or apathy?
-- Don't know. Don't care.
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email sponsored by: ApacheCon 2003,
16-19 November in Las Vegas. Learn firsthand the latest
developments in Apache, PHP, Perl, XML, Java, MySQL,
WebDAV, and more! http://www.apachecon.com/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Bitfield usage in FADT table?
[not found] ` <20031111185717.GH29175-kk6yZipjEM5g9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org>
2003-11-11 20:26 ` maxime bizon
@ 2003-11-12 0:15 ` Karol Kozimor
1 sibling, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: Karol Kozimor @ 2003-11-12 0:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ducrot Bruno; +Cc: max-ZrNlpQwM5lQ, acpi-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f
Thus wrote Ducrot Bruno:
> > I own a Latitude X200 notebook, with kernel 2.6.0-test9 installed, and
> > S3 doesn't work. It was posted here a few days ago. S3 does suspend
> > the computer but it is impossible to turn it on again.
> S3 seems to be broken in that kernel, anyway.
Strange, it worked fine on my system, keyboard and USB problems aside.
Best regards,
--
Karol 'sziwan' Kozimor
sziwan-DETuoxkZsSqrDJvtcaxF/A@public.gmane.org
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email sponsored by: ApacheCon 2003,
16-19 November in Las Vegas. Learn firsthand the latest
developments in Apache, PHP, Perl, XML, Java, MySQL,
WebDAV, and more! http://www.apachecon.com/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2003-11-12 0:15 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2003-11-11 16:15 Bitfield usage in FADT table? maxime bizon
[not found] ` <20031111161527.GC23128-AroONJ29hSVWj0EZb7rXcA@public.gmane.org>
2003-11-11 17:02 ` Ducrot Bruno
[not found] ` <20031111170245.GE29175-kk6yZipjEM5g9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org>
2003-11-11 17:18 ` maximE bizon
[not found] ` <20031111171845.GA19024-llVo0kcOI43s6UcQ8r3GPg@public.gmane.org>
2003-11-11 17:55 ` Ducrot Bruno
2003-11-11 17:57 ` Ducrot Bruno
[not found] ` <20031111175730.GG29175-kk6yZipjEM5g9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org>
2003-11-11 18:25 ` maximE bizon
[not found] ` <20031111182522.GA19215-llVo0kcOI43s6UcQ8r3GPg@public.gmane.org>
2003-11-11 18:57 ` Ducrot Bruno
[not found] ` <20031111185717.GH29175-kk6yZipjEM5g9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org>
2003-11-11 20:26 ` maxime bizon
[not found] ` <20031111202613.GA25458-AroONJ29hSVWj0EZb7rXcA@public.gmane.org>
2003-11-11 20:34 ` Ducrot Bruno
[not found] ` <20031111203433.GN29175-kk6yZipjEM5g9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org>
2003-11-11 20:46 ` maximE bizon
[not found] ` <20031111204627.GA26007-AroONJ29hSVWj0EZb7rXcA@public.gmane.org>
2003-11-11 20:47 ` Ducrot Bruno
2003-11-12 0:15 ` Karol Kozimor
2003-11-11 17:23 ` Randy.Dunlap
[not found] ` <20031111092316.124cdfa0.rddunlap-3NddpPZAyC0@public.gmane.org>
2003-11-11 17:48 ` maximE bizon
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox