From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthew Garrett Subject: Re: T30 boot hang with CONFIG_PM_LEGACY=n Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2006 15:47:31 +0100 Message-ID: <20060927144731.GA3641@srcf.ucam.org> References: <20060927024628.GA29182@redhat.com> <200609270000.40760.len.brown@intel.com> <20060927042029.GA3571@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from cavan.codon.org.uk ([217.147.92.49]:58855 "EHLO vavatch.codon.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932418AbWI0OsH (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Sep 2006 10:48:07 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060927042029.GA3571@redhat.com> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Dave Jones Cc: Len Brown , Jeff Garzik , linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, Linux-pm mailing list On Wed, Sep 27, 2006 at 12:20:29AM -0400, Dave Jones wrote: > Good question. There's no real replacement for pm_active in the non-legacy > config afaik. Perhaps the cleanest alternative is to undeprecate that macro? > The only other option I can think of is doing something like this in apm.c ... > > +#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI > - if (PM_IS_ACTIVE()) { > printk(KERN_NOTICE "apm: overridden by ACPI.\n"); > apm_info.disabled = 1; > return -ENODEV; > - } > +#endif That's not a good choice - it needs to be a runtime check, not a compile-time one. Don't we have an acpi_enabled() function? -- Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org