From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andi Kleen Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for June 13: IO APIC breakage on HP nx6325 Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2008 11:24:41 +0200 Message-ID: <4868A659.2080308@firstfloor.org> References: <20080613232214.394fd6fd.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <20080629200210.GB31633@elte.hu> <200806300106.38414.rjw@sisk.pl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Ingo Molnar , Matthew Garrett , Stephen Rothwell , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, LKML , Thomas Gleixner , ACPI Devel Maling List , Len Brown , Andi Kleen , Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org > That is certainly true for standard hardware. We have to take > responsibility for own bugs, sure. I cannot readily understand why you > apparently try to imply hardware vendors do not. Sorry Maciej, you're totally off base on that. On consumer hardware vendors very rarely fix anything after release of the machine and in general users expect Linux to work around any BIOS or hardware bugs that happen (especially if it's a regression and worked before) So you either need to provide a workaround for the problem or your patches should be reverted. -Andi