On Mon, Nov 10, 2025 at 8:47 PM Borislav Petkov <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 10, 2025 at 09:49:38AM -0800, Ricardo Neri wrote: > > I apologize for my late reply. Also, I am sorry I was not clear. I needed to > > consult with a few stakeholders whether they could live with the increase in > > size resulting from having CONFIG_ACPI=y. They can. > > > > If it is OK with Rafael, I plan to post a new version that drops this patch > > and > > adds the necessary function stubs for the !CONFIG_ACPI case. > > Sounds good to me.
Yeah, sounds good. > It is the simplest thing to do. If the size increase bothers someone, we can > always do the more involved refactoring later. So long as they have a good enough justification for it that is.
