[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070409030459.GC30109@in.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2007 08:34:59 +0530
From: Gautham R Shenoy <ego@...ibm.com>
To: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
paulmck@...ibm.com, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, vatsa@...ibm.com,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>, mingo@...e.hu,
dipankar@...ibm.com, dino@...ibm.com,
masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] Enhance process freezer interface for usage beyond software suspend
On Mon, Apr 02, 2007 at 10:51:27PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > >
> > > Should we create CONFIG_FREEZER?
> >
> > Why do you think so? I think the freezer should be compiled automatically
> > if any of the above is set, which is what this directive really means.
>
> Kconfig can do that. ("select statement"). If we have one such ifdef,
> it is okay, but if it would be more of them.
>
Ok.
> > > Eh? Why does kprobes code depend on config_pm?
> >
> > Because it uses the freezer? ;-)
>
> That is no longer true after this patch... Ugly ifdef above makes sure
> freezer is there for kprobes. I'm trying to say that #if above is
> now broken. Actually it was probably always broken, but it just became
> more so.
I have already removed it from in my version 3.
Thanks and Regards
gautham.
--
Gautham R Shenoy
Linux Technology Center
IBM India.
"Freedom comes with a price tag of responsibility, which is still a bargain,
because Freedom is priceless!"
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists