Re: Bug#404143: Fans unreliable under load, permanent memory leak
- To: Jurij Smakov <email@example.com>, firstname.lastname@example.org
- Cc: maximilian attems <email@example.com>, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
- Subject: Re: Bug#404143: Fans unreliable under load, permanent memory leak
- From: Steve Langasek <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2006 00:55:30 -0800
- Message-id: <[🔎] 20061228085530.GH29295@mauritius.dodds.net>
- Mail-followup-to: Steve Langasek <email@example.com>, Jurij Smakov <firstname.lastname@example.org>, email@example.com, maximilian attems <firstname.lastname@example.org>, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
- In-reply-to: <[🔎] 20061227025206.GB10652@droopy.oc.cox.net>
- References: <[🔎] 200612220051.kBM0paO12890@weequay.is.scarlet.be> <[🔎] 20061222081223.GI21469@baikonur.stro.at> <[🔎] 20061224020755.GC2274@mail.lowpingbastards.de> <[🔎] 20061227020901.GA10501@droopy.oc.cox.net> <[🔎] 20061227024058.GN21469@baikonur.stro.at> <[🔎] 20061227025206.GB10652@droopy.oc.cox.net>
On Tue, Dec 26, 2006 at 06:52:06PM -0800, Jurij Smakov wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 27, 2006 at 03:40:58AM +0100, maximilian attems wrote:
> > > I have reviewed the information available on the thermal problems with
> > > HP laptops, and it appears that there is a fairly conservative set of
> > > patches which takes care of the problems (thanks to Bas for pointing
> > > most of the out). I might have missed some upstream bugs, so please
> > > let me know if there is anything else available on the issue. Below is
> > > the summary, describing the relevant patches:
> > i nack the mentioned patches!
> Well, that's one in favor and one vote against then.
I'm going to have to side with maks on this. The last thing we need at this
point of the release is a complex backported patch, targetted or not, that's
going to require a lot of third-party testing before we can even establish
whether it's caused regressions for other systems.
I think that leaves the best option as ACPI blacklisting, in the kernel, for
those models known to have problems. I think this is strictly better than
trying to have the kernel give a warning when it detects such a model; it's
more likely to reach the target audience than a note in the release notes;
and it's far less of a support burden overall than trying to add in a
special 2.6.19 kernel in and pretend that support for it could be at all
comparable to that of the main kernel for the release.
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.