From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Oliver Neukum Subject: Re: [PATCH] ACPI:remove panic in case hardware has changed after S4 Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2013 13:29:47 +0200 Message-ID: <5742401.D3Ye1zZPh5@linux-5eaq.site> References: <1373544870-15135-1-git-send-email-oliver@neukum.org> <6802146.fKe43BS873@skinner.arch.suse.de> <1373618715.7539.106.camel@linux-s257.site> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Return-path: Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:34264 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755636Ab3GOL2K (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Jul 2013 07:28:10 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1373618715.7539.106.camel@linux-s257.site> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: joeyli Cc: Thomas Renninger , lenb@kernel.org, rjw@sisk.pl, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On Friday 12 July 2013 16:45:15 joeyli wrote: > Per information from OEM, Windows 8 didn't really block S4 resume when > hardware_signature not match, I think as Oliver's patch. Is that confidential information? If it is indeed true, introducing a blacklist makes no sense. And I see no alternative to my patch. Should I resubmit with an improved comment? Regards Oliver