From owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org Mon Oct 21 07:03:24 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E5D6175EC8 for ; Mon, 21 Oct 2019 07:03:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mueller6722@twc.com) Received: from dnvrco-cmomta01.email.rr.com (dnvrco-outbound-snat.email.rr.com [107.14.73.225]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "Client", Issuer "CA" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46xSK74f6mz3M8T for ; Mon, 21 Oct 2019 07:03:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mueller6722@twc.com) Received: from localhost ([96.28.161.151]) by cmsmtp with ESMTP id MRioiOjpP7K91MRiriuTxA; Mon, 21 Oct 2019 07:03:21 +0000 Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2019 07:01:47 +0000 From: "Thomas Mueller" To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: DRM-current-kmod is still a problem at r353339 References: <7ca3b30a-81f6-f79d-1486-7fd29765646f@acm.org> <99c89ca0-462c-f4c7-fa07-6f61e9d39d66@acm.org> <3bb2e410-51dd-bc3f-7660-41a4683551b3@daemonic.se> <20191017195347.GB6447@raichu> <53ff1ac5-c7e8-1b6c-bd43-481eaef61120@daemonic.se> <72d67f0a-aeef-1c06-2b12-9351a1f52060@anduin.net> <689d53378dcca22adb29aa23f03e8e1b@neelc.org> <25593555-6452-0933-d0fe-0459425cde55@delphij.net> <7cb6ecd6-2dcd-92e4-75a3-5e5d34377ed6@yuripv.net> X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4wfO9EwBQ8TQ8jyEEoWj0Jra6pi2VLQqmwQQlUsBtX/HdoPUNq5ysZkxl2zjsgkYMpSlRdBi/0lCmLQaisQ4CciSkCwk7zZdqBADjZphRr5FwYbjzALnMq AqYB4bpbGM8Ej4BJ9PZ9VecgMZYBY1A+j5V5F+BSykvrJ72jHxiVluuA X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 46xSK74f6mz3M8T X-Spamd-Bar: / Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of mueller6722@twc.com designates 107.14.73.225 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=mueller6722@twc.com X-Spamd-Result: default: False [0.24 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-0.96)[-0.963,0]; RECEIVED_SPAMHAUS_PBL(0.00)[151.161.28.96.khpj7ygk5idzvmvt5x4ziurxhy.zen.dq.spamhaus.net : 127.0.0.10]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:107.14.73.0/24]; FREEMAIL_FROM(0.00)[twc.com]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[twc.com]; IP_SCORE_FREEMAIL(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-0.999,0]; MISSING_MID(2.50)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[225.73.14.107.list.dnswl.org : 127.0.5.0]; RCVD_TLS_LAST(0.00)[]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; FREEMAIL_ENVFROM(0.00)[twc.com]; ASN(0.00)[asn:7843, ipnet:107.14.73.0/24, country:US]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; IP_SCORE(0.00)[ip: (-7.40), ipnet: 107.14.73.0/24(-2.71), asn: 7843(-2.17), country: US(-0.05)]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2] X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2019 07:03:24 -0000 from Neel Chauhan: > For me, the following code is still necessary for me (HP Spectre x360 > 2018), which is the remaining parts of the patches not committed if you > are using a recent kernel. I don't know about you all ThinkPad users, it > should still apply as it's Intel in general not just HP or Lenovo. > Without these patches, I get a kernel panic. > Keep in mind that the patch may render as spaces, but it should be tabs. What happens if the patch is applied with spaces as opposed to tabs? I believe, in C, there is no difference as far as compiling is concerned. Or is it just a standard for formatting? Tom