From: Chris Meadors (axpclubneon.com)
Date: Sat Oct 25 2003 - 18:04:30 CDT

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Thu, 2003-10-23 at 10:14, Jay Estabrook wrote:

> diff -Naurp old/arch/alpha/kernel/setup.c new/arch/alpha/kernel/setup.c
> --- old/arch/alpha/kernel/setup.c Fri Oct 17 17:42:55 2003
> +++ new/arch/alpha/kernel/setup.c Thu Oct 23 09:57:40 2003
> -486,6 +486,21 setup_arch(char **cmdline_p)
> hwrpb = (struct hwrpb_struct*) __va(INIT_HWRPB->phys_addr);
> boot_cpuid = hard_smp_processor_id();
>
> + /*
> + * Pre-process the system type to make sure it will be valid.
> + *
> + * This may restore real CABRIO and EB66+ family names, ie
> + * EB64+ and EB66.
> + *
> + * Oh, and "white box" AS800 (aka DIGITAL Server 3000 series)
> + * and AS1200 (DIGITAL Server 5000 series) have the type as
> + * the negative of the real one.
> + */
> + if ((long)hwrpb->sys_type < 0) {
> + hwrpb->sys_type = -((long)hwrpb->sys_type);
> + hwrpb_update_checksum(hwrpb);
> + }
> +
> /* Register a call for panic conditions. */
> notifier_chain_register(&panic_notifier_list, &alpha_panic_block);

This patch didn't make it into -test9. Linus is still accepting "won't
boot" patches for final 2.6.0 release. What is the proper chain to
submit Alpha patches?

--
Chris

_______________________________________________
axp-list mailing list
axp-listredhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/axp-list

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]