From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark Brown Subject: Re: [PATCH] PM: Hide CONFIG_PM from users Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2011 19:30:26 +0000 Message-ID: <20110207193026.GT10564@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> References: <1297081335-13631-1-git-send-email-broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <201102072014.04259.rjw@sisk.pl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201102072014.04259.rjw@sisk.pl> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Len Brown , Alan Stern , linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton , Dmitry Torokhov , linux-embedded@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar On Mon, Feb 07, 2011 at 08:14:03PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Monday, February 07, 2011, Mark Brown wrote: > > config PM_DEBUG > > bool "Power Management Debug Support" > I think it would be better to simply rename CONFIG_PM_OPS into CONFIG_PM. That still leaves the IA64 emulator to worry about but I'm not fundamentally opposed to that, it achieves a similar effect. The main thing I'm looking for here is to cut down on the configuration options we have to maintain. > However, there's a number of things that I'm afraid wouldn't build correctly > if none of CONFIG_PM_SLEEP and CONFIG_PM_RUNTIME were set in that case. Actually CONFIG_PM_OPS probably also wants to be on independantly of those two sometimes for .poweroff() which I'd expect to run even if we can't suspend.