From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Daniel Lezcano Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/9] ARM: cpuidle: remove useless declaration Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2013 16:31:43 +0200 Message-ID: <517003CF.5090106@linaro.org> References: <1364991322-20585-1-git-send-email-daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> <515C1F3B.5040008@linaro.org> <20130418141359.GT14496@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: Received: from mail-bk0-f43.google.com ([209.85.214.43]:53051 "EHLO mail-bk0-f43.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965622Ab3DRObt (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Apr 2013 10:31:49 -0400 Received: by mail-bk0-f43.google.com with SMTP id jm19so103703bkc.16 for ; Thu, 18 Apr 2013 07:31:48 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20130418141359.GT14496@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Sender: linux-pm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org To: Russell King - ARM Linux Cc: rjw@sisk.pl, deepthi@linux.vnet.ibm.com, linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org, swarren@wwwdotorg.org, patches@linaro.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, rnayak@ti.com, nsekhar@ti.com, josephl@nvidia.com, linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org, horms+renesas@verge.net.au, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, lenb@kernel.org On 04/18/2013 04:13 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Wed, Apr 03, 2013 at 02:23:23PM +0200, Daniel Lezcano wrote: >> On 04/03/2013 02:15 PM, Daniel Lezcano wrote: >>> The noop functions code is not necessary because the header file is >>> included in files which are compiled when CONFIG_CPU_IDLE is on. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano >> >> I have been involved in the development of this file. I know Rob is = no >> longer working on this neither monitoring the code. >> >> Russell are you ok with this patch ? Rafael needs your ack to take t= his >> patch into its tree. >=20 > I don't know - the description doesn't make it clear. Surely, what y= ou > checked was that this file is _not_ included in any file which is bui= lt > when CONFIG_CPU_IDLE is disabled. In other words, when CONFIG_CPU_ID= LE > is not defined, arm_cpuidle_simple_enter() is never referenced. >=20 > If that is the case, then it's just that the patch description is the > opposite of what it should be for this patch - and then the patch and > description match and I don't see any reason to say no to it. >=20 > Then comes the issue of who takes the patch. It looks like Rafael > would like me to. Actually Rafael was willing to take the patch if you ack it. --=20 Linaro.org =E2=94=82 Open source software for= ARM SoCs =46ollow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog