[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20110208021916.68b33b37.sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2011 02:19:16 +1100
From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>, Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>,
Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
linux-embedded@...r.kernel.org,
ppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PM: Hide CONFIG_PM from users
On Tue, 8 Feb 2011 02:10:45 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 7 Feb 2011 16:00:55 +0100 Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org> wrote:
> >
> > $ git grep "CONFIG_PM is not set"
> > 7cf3d73b4360e91b14326632ab1aeda4cb26308d^ -- arch/ | wc -l
> > 256
> > $
> >
> > 7cf3d73b4360e91b14326632ab1aeda4cb26308d is the commit that introduced
> > savedefconfig, so that's a safe revision with untrimmed defconfigs.
>
> Yeah, but we can't tell if CONFIG_PM is turned off on purpose in those
> defconfigs, or just off because noone explicitly turned it on.
At least some of the powerpc defconfigs were added with CONFIG_PM
disabled. I assume that was on purpose (though it may not have been).
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell sfr@...b.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/
Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists