On Sat, 26 Jan 2008 14:31:01 +0100, Stefan Richter said:Beats me - I don't see it on an 'lspci' ;) But I'm pretty sure it doesn't have a 'powerpc' in it, so those threads get *totally* skipped... My point was "personal interest in the domain" may not be a great way to tell if a given thread has a stability risk - but I suspect that for the vast majority of testers like myself who aren't paid to be kernel hackers, if it isn't something they can trip over on the one or two machines they can easily test on, it isn't code they're going to review.... (Note that it extends past just hardware too - my config has selinux in it, so those threads at least *might* get looked at. cpusets or ocfs2? If I read those threads, it's probably by accident... :)
| Kok, Auke | Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23 - ioat/dma engine |
| Jeff Garzik | Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 |
| Greg Kroah-Hartman | [PATCH 001/196] Chinese: Add the known_regression URI to the HOWTO |
| Matthew Garrett | [PATCH] Remove process freezer from suspend to RAM pathway |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 15/37] dccp: Set per-connection CCIDs via socket options |
| David Miller | [GIT]: Networking |
| Jarek Poplawski | Re: [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
| Jens Axboe | Re: [BUG] New Kernel Bugs |
git: | |
