Hi, On Saturday, 30 June 2007 12:11, Pavel Machek wrote: > Hi! > > > > > Sorry, but I can't resist the opportunity to say "Send a patch!" :) > > > > > > > > Seriously, though, I'd prefer not to. If we rename that acpi video > > > > flags > > > > variable (I assume this is what you're thinking of), we only create > > > > cause for > > > > confusion. A variable should for debugging or for controlling quirks, > > > > not for > > > > both at the same time. > > > > > > Cause for confusion? We are currently using 2 bits of that variable, > > > and we want to add one more bit. I seriously doubt that can confuse > > > anyone. > > > > Well, indeed it would be more elegant to rename the existing flags variable > > and use another bit out of it, but I personally don't think it's _that_ > > important. At least, I don't think we should block the patch > > because of that. > > It is not _that_ important. > > > BTW, has anyone confirmed that it works on i386? > > If you have patch somewhere nearby, I can test it on i386 and make it > use just one flags variable.
http://www.sisk.pl/kernel/hibernation_and_suspend/2.6.22-rc6/patches/28-Optional-Beeping-During-Resume-From-RAM.patch Greetings, Rafael -- "Premature optimization is the root of all evil." - Donald Knuth - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
