On 07/10/14 06:28, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> pm_power_off is defined for all architectures. Move it to common code.
>
> Have all architectures call do_kernel_poweroff instead of pm_power_off.
> Some architectures point pm_power_off to machine_power_off. For those,
> call do_kernel_poweroff from machine_power_off instead.
[...]
> arch/x86/xen/enlighten.c | 3 +--
The xen bits:
Acked-by: David Vrabel <[email protected]>
Although for a mechanical change like this I wonder if acks from all
subsystem maintainers is really necessary.
David
On 10/07/2014 02:23 AM, David Vrabel wrote:
> On 07/10/14 06:28, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>> pm_power_off is defined for all architectures. Move it to common code.
>>
>> Have all architectures call do_kernel_poweroff instead of pm_power_off.
>> Some architectures point pm_power_off to machine_power_off. For those,
>> call do_kernel_poweroff from machine_power_off instead.
> [...]
>> arch/x86/xen/enlighten.c | 3 +--
>
> The xen bits:
>
> Acked-by: David Vrabel <[email protected]>
>
> Although for a mechanical change like this I wonder if acks from all
> subsystem maintainers is really necessary.
>
Probably not, but helpful. On the other side, as others may have
noticed, sending an e-mail with that many Cc: gets it classified
as spam by many mailers. I'll have to find a way to cut that down
for the next round without offending anyone.
Guenter