PM_TRACE is stable for quite long. I don't think it needs to depend on
experimental.
Signed-off-by: Pavel Machek <[email protected]>
---
commit 710f4e9070c453e743fcfa1a6017075026c4967b
tree 7f3fe656004f2d21b6a9cbe1264f9f2236572456
parent ea977ecb4f994b0dc2e09cab3dbba87aad030d99
author Pavel <[email protected]> Thu, 14 Aug 2008 17:18:07 +0200
committer Pavel <[email protected]> Thu, 14 Aug 2008 17:18:07 +0200
kernel/power/Kconfig | 2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/power/Kconfig b/kernel/power/Kconfig
index dcd165f..1800674 100644
--- a/kernel/power/Kconfig
+++ b/kernel/power/Kconfig
@@ -36,7 +36,7 @@ config PM_VERBOSE
config CAN_PM_TRACE
def_bool y
- depends on PM_DEBUG && PM_SLEEP && EXPERIMENTAL
+ depends on PM_DEBUG && PM_SLEEP
config PM_TRACE
bool
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
On 14.08.2008 17:18 Pavel Machek wrote:
> PM_TRACE is stable for quite long. I don't think it needs to depend on
> experimental.
It might be stable, but its effect of trashing the RTC makes it unsuitable
for non-experimental use. Therefore I'd prefer the dependency be kept.
Thanks,
Tilman
Hi.
On Fri, 2008-08-15 at 19:11 +0200, Tilman Schmidt wrote:
> On 14.08.2008 17:18 Pavel Machek wrote:
> > PM_TRACE is stable for quite long. I don't think it needs to depend on
> > experimental.
>
> It might be stable, but its effect of trashing the RTC makes it unsuitable
> for non-experimental use. Therefore I'd prefer the dependency be kept.
I think you're confusing 'experimental' and 'debugging'. You certainly
wouldn't want to use it routinely, but that doesn't mean it's still an
experimental feature.
Regards,
Nigel
> On 14.08.2008 17:18 Pavel Machek wrote:
> > PM_TRACE is stable for quite long. I don't think it needs to depend on
> > experimental.
>
> It might be stable, but its effect of trashing the RTC makes it unsuitable
> for non-experimental use. Therefore I'd prefer the dependency be kept.
Given that it is enabled in both 32-bit and 64-bit defconfig, I don't
think we can call it experimental.
Plus IIRC it needs command line option to thrash RTC.
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
On Sunday, 17 of August 2008, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > On 14.08.2008 17:18 Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > PM_TRACE is stable for quite long. I don't think it needs to depend on
> > > experimental.
> >
> > It might be stable, but its effect of trashing the RTC makes it unsuitable
> > for non-experimental use. Therefore I'd prefer the dependency be kept.
>
> Given that it is enabled in both 32-bit and 64-bit defconfig, I don't
> think we can call it experimental.
I agree.
> Plus IIRC it needs command line option to thrash RTC.
That's correct.
Thanks,
Rafael
Rafael J. Wysocki schrieb:
> On Sunday, 17 of August 2008, Pavel Machek wrote:
>> Given that it is enabled in both 32-bit and 64-bit defconfig, I don't
>> think we can call it experimental.
>
> I agree.
>
>> Plus IIRC it needs command line option to thrash RTC.
>
> That's correct.
Alright, I withdraw my objection.
T.
On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 07:11:36PM +0200, Tilman Schmidt wrote:
> On 14.08.2008 17:18 Pavel Machek wrote:
> > PM_TRACE is stable for quite long. I don't think it needs to depend on
> > experimental.
>
> It might be stable, but its effect of trashing the RTC makes it unsuitable
> for non-experimental use. Therefore I'd prefer the dependency be kept.
It only does that if you boot with command line options to enable it.
Besides, CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL was always about code maturity, not a
safety net for people who don't read the descriptions.
Pavels change makes sense to me.
Dave
--
http://www.codemonkey.org.uk