25 May
2009
25 May
'09
7:29 a.m.
At Mon, 25 May 2009 00:24:07 +0300, Ozan Çağlayan wrote:
Takashi Iwai wrote:
Thanks, applied now with a minor fix (reordering the entry).
But, looking at the change, it might be that the entry 1046:1262 could be a typo. It should be harmless, though :)
Yes it's strange that the vendor ID seems different from one variant to another.
BTW, is the 3rd parameter to the macro is used for DMI matching or is it just for informational purposes?
It's a string shown in debug messages. It's compiled in only when the debug option is set.
DMI matching could be another candidate for this kind of quirk, yes.
thanks,
Takashi