Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for April 4 [BROKEN thinkpad_acpi]

From: Joe Perches <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2011 08:13:32 -0700

On Mon, 2011-04-04 at 17:08 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 5:02 PM, Joe Perches <[email-masked]> wrote:
> > On Mon, 2011-04-04 at 16:44 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> >> > I have tried with solution #2 as it partially restores old behaviour
> >> > (patch is attached).
> > Partially?  Please explain.
> -#define vdbg_printk(a_dbg_level, format, arg...) \
> -       do { } while (0)
> +#define vdbg_printk(a_dbg_level, format, arg...)       \
> +       no_printk(format, ##arg)

I understand the reversed patch.

My point was focused on the word "partially".