From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?S=E9rgio?= Monteiro Basto Subject: Re: [PATCH] ACPI poweroff fixes for 2.4.26-pre2 Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 22:50:58 +0000 Sender: acpi-devel-admin-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org Message-ID: <1080255058.4187.1.camel@darkstar> References: <20040308183228.GD484@elf.ucw.cz> <20040308201411.GA18636@alpha.home.local> <20040308205444.GH484@elf.ucw.cz> <20040309233325.GA22953@alpha.home.local> <1079279490.10225.10.camel@darkstar> <20040315210729.GA19306@alpha.home.local> <1079389434.3695.2.camel@darkstar> <20040315231927.GA19829@alpha.home.local> <20040322105946.GC1505@openzaurus.ucw.cz> <1080253327.3755.20.camel@darkstar> <20040325222934.GF2179@elf.ucw.cz> Reply-To: sergiomb-hHo3WeeoaswVhHzd4jOs4w@public.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20040325222934.GF2179-I/5MKhXcvmPrBKCeMvbIDA@public.gmane.org> Errors-To: acpi-devel-admin-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: To: Pavel Machek Cc: Willy Tarreau , Bruno Ducrot , acpi-devel , Len Brown List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org so acpi_system_save_state(state) does do nothing at all ? or does return nothing at all ? On Thu, 2004-03-25 at 22:29, Pavel Machek wrote: > On =C8t 25-03-04 22:22:07, S=E9rgio Monteiro Basto wrote: > > hi(gh)! > > On Mon, 2004-03-22 at 10:59, Pavel Machek wrote: > > > Hi! > > >=20 > > > > > and status =3D acacpi_system_save_state()pi_system_save_state(sta= te);=20 > > > > > on line 341 of drivers/acpi/system.c ? > > > >=20 > > > > OK sorry, I didn't notice it. So you'll simply have to remove the > > > > first hunk of the patch so that acpi_system_save_state() stays defi= ned > > > > at least when CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP is defined. > > >=20 > > > In such case... at least insert BUG() into fake acpi_system_save_stat= e method. > >=20 > > Well you say that is a bug and I ask how do you translate=20 > > status =3D acpi_system_save_state(state); if not I think that will be > > inefficient.=20 >=20 > ? Sorry, parse error on my part. >=20 > *If* you replace acpi_system_save_state() with stub that does nothing > based on config option *and* someone tries to use it, they are not > getting the functionality they want, right? And therefore calling it > is a BUG(). > Pavel --=20 S=E9rgio M. B. ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of GenToo technologies. Learn everything from fundamentals to system administration.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1470&alloc_id=3638&op=click