On Mon, 2011-09-19 at 07:52 +0900, Mattia Dongili wrote: > I'm wondering if it's worth updating cpufrequtils in Squeeze to the > current version in testing/unstable. > There are a couple of fixes that are worth considering in there and > namely: fixing support for linux 3.0 (some modules have been moved > and broke assumptions in cpufrequtils init scripts) and support for AMD > family 20 CPUs.
Apologies for the delay in getting back to you about this. [...] > + * Bulk load only helper modules. Linux 3.0 shuffled cpufreq modules > + locations a bit and now cpu drivers and helpers are in the same directory > + (closes: #636141). > + * Use modprobe -b in loadcpufreq to honour blacklisted modules > + (closes: #592488). > + * Load powernow-k8 for AMD family 20 (i.e. AMD E-350 cpus) > + (closes: #627811). > + * Stop changing printk levels when loading cpufreq modules (closes: #624575 > + and closes: #596235). I've been debating whether to accept all of the changes, and changed my mind a few times while arguing with myself. :-) Have the changes been tested on a stable system? Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1321205590.24030.38.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
