From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] [resend] thermal: improvements re. forced passive cooling Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 15:35:51 -0700 Message-ID: <20091028153551.6c665ca1.akpm@linux-foundation.org> References: <1256542744-26569-1-git-send-email-elendil@planet.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([140.211.169.13]:34615 "EHLO smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753497AbZJ1Wfy (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Oct 2009 18:35:54 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1256542744-26569-1-git-send-email-elendil@planet.nl> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Frans Pop Cc: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Zhang Rui , Sujith Thomas , Matthew Garrett On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 08:38:58 +0100 Frans Pop wrote: > > Please consider this patch set for 2.6.32. It was previously submitted > for 2.6.31, but AFAICT it has not yet been picked up. > > All patches have been acked by either Rui or Matthew, with the > exception of 1/6 and 4/6, but the entire series has been implicitly > acked by Rui in http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13918#c26. > > The patch set closes http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13918. > > Andrew, could you take the set just in case? > I'm trying to work out what the actual bug is in here. afacit some KDE tool put wrong numbers into /proc files, acpi didn't sanity check them sufficiently and permitted the CPU to overheat, yes? There seems to be rather a lot of non-bugfix stuff in this patch series. Perhaps too much for 2.6.32, and a real problem if we want to backport something into 2.6.31.x and earlier.