http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1112963 http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1112963#c104 --- Comment #104 from Jean Delvare <jdelvare@suse.com> --- (In reply to Edward Van Every from comment #102)
(This is a custom kernel, right?)
I don't know what you call a "customer kernel". This is the latest (not yet released) openSUSE Leap 15.0 kernel with 2 ast driver patches on top. No config change. If you are worried that it contains too many differences compared to the latest released kernel, then I suppose I could create a different kernel package based on the latest released openSUSE Leap 15.0 kernel instead. For testing purposes, I did not think that it would matter much, as the other changes will be included in the next kernel anyway.
Since our customer environment appears stable now (using the "video=vesafb:mtrr:3" parameter), I don't want to be pushing out forked kernels unless absolutely necessary.
I'm puzzled. In comments #66 and #67 you stated that option "video=vesafb:mtrr:3" was not safe to use. Now you think it is better to run with this unsafe option than to run a kernel which contains what is believed to be the proper fix to the problem? Also I have no idea what you mean with "forked kernel".
The video option has bought us some time to wait for an updated "published" kernel in this case I think. (via online software update)
Anyone know how long that might take?
It will never happen if you don't test it first. You are the only user reporting this problem. The fix is not even upstream. My plan was to let you test the fix, and if it works for you, ping upstream for inclusion. From there, the fix can be backported to openSUSE Leap 15.0 and other products. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.