[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1403043991.1984.42.camel@x220>
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 00:26:31 +0200
From: Paul Bolle <pebolle@...cali.nl>
To: Kamal Mostafa <kamal@...onical.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org,
kernel-team@...ts.ubuntu.com,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3.13 089/212] ACPI: Remove Kconfig symbol ACPI_PROCFS
Kamal,
On Tue, 2014-06-17 at 14:43 -0700, Kamal Mostafa wrote:
> 3.13.11.4 -stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
>
> ------------------
>
> From: Paul Bolle <pebolle@...cali.nl>
>
> commit 7919010c4224e07b871f3b5513d245cc029fcd67 upstream.
>
> Nothing cares about ACPI_PROCFS. This has been the case since v2.6.38.
> This Kconfig symbol serves no purpose and its help text is now
> misleading. It can safely be removed. If this symbol would be needed
> again in the future it can be readded in a commit that adds code that
> actually uses it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Paul Bolle <pebolle@...cali.nl>
> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
> [ kamal: 3.13-stable prereq for
> e2a7c3d ACPI: Revert "ACPI: Remove CONFIG_ACPI_PROCFS_POWER and cm_sbsc.c" ]
I'm curious: how can this patch - which is straightforward cleanup,
without any further impact - be a prerequisite for a revert, or anything
else, for that matter?
> Signed-off-by: Kamal Mostafa <kamal@...onical.com>
Paul Bolle
--
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