Re: [PATCH] 2.6, 2.4, Nforce2, Experimental idle halt workaround instead of apic ack delay.
From: Prakash K. Cheemplavam (PrakashKC_at_gmx.de)
Date: 02/23/04
- Previous message: Andrew Morton: "Re: [PATCH] runtime PM deadlock"
- In reply to: Ross Dickson: "Re: [PATCH] 2.6, 2.4, Nforce2, Experimental idle halt workaround instead of apic ack delay."
- Next in thread: Ross Dickson: "Re: [PATCH] 2.6, 2.4, Nforce2, Experimental idle halt workaround instead of apic ack delay."
- Reply: Ross Dickson: "Re: [PATCH] 2.6, 2.4, Nforce2, Experimental idle halt workaround instead of apic ack delay."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 02:37:37 +0100 To: ross@datscreative.com.au
Oh before I forget, I had to resolve a reject by hand, but I *think* I
did it right. (And yes, I used your corrected versionof the patch.)
Well, maybe you take a look over the patch and rediff. :-)
Prakash
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Previous message: Andrew Morton: "Re: [PATCH] runtime PM deadlock"
- In reply to: Ross Dickson: "Re: [PATCH] 2.6, 2.4, Nforce2, Experimental idle halt workaround instead of apic ack delay."
- Next in thread: Ross Dickson: "Re: [PATCH] 2.6, 2.4, Nforce2, Experimental idle halt workaround instead of apic ack delay."
- Reply: Ross Dickson: "Re: [PATCH] 2.6, 2.4, Nforce2, Experimental idle halt workaround instead of apic ack delay."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]