Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 18:57:04 -0800
From: Jason Uhlenkott <jasonuhl@sgi.com>
To: Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
       ACPI Developers <acpi-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [ACPI] Re: 2.6.12-rc1-mm3
Message-ID: <20050326025704.GE207782@dragonfly.engr.sgi.com>
References: <20050325002154.335c6b0b.akpm@osdl.org> <20050326014327.GB207782@dragonfly.engr.sgi.com> <1111802218.19916.59.camel@d845pe> <20050326020212.GC207782@dragonfly.engr.sgi.com> <1111803861.19920.91.camel@d845pe>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1111803861.19920.91.camel@d845pe>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1173
Lines: 26

On Fri, Mar 25, 2005 at 09:24:21PM -0500, Len Brown wrote:
> What bad things happen if you define CONFIG_PM on SN2?

None, other than slightly enlarging the kernel with some
suspend/resume stuff we don't care about.  It's always been
unavailable for SN2 builds:

depends on IA64_GENERIC || IA64_DIG || IA64_HP_ZX1 || IA64_HP_ZX1_SWIOTLB

but there doesn't appear to be any particular reason for that other
than us not needing it (and in fact SN2 systems can run IA64_GENERIC
kernels with CONFIG_PM enabled without incident).

> Re: CONFIG_ACPI_BOOT
> I've got a patch that makes it go away -- this looks like
> a good reason for me to dust it off...  Looks like
> arch/ia64/Kconfig defines ACPI and then pulls in drivers/acpi/Kconfig,
> which it should not do - it should look like i386/Kconfig...

Sounds good to me.  Does that mean everything currently controlled by
CONFIG_ACPI_BOOT will be controlled by CONFIG_ACPI instead?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/