On 3/6/07, Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 1. drop !CONFIG_PM configuration
> 2. continue to sprinkle #ifdef's over device drivers
> 3. find out prettier way to mark PM functions
...of 3., and code is nicely generic and fairly simple. I thought it
would be too much work to implemente i
Hi!
> > Much complexity for little gain. Who is running _without_ CONFIG_PM
> > these days?
>
> Embedded people, I guess. The problem here is that if we are gonna
> support !CONFIG_PM configuration and try to reduce the kernel/module
> images size for such case, we end up sprinkling #ifdef's all
Pavel Machek wrote:
> Much complexity for little gain. Who is running _without_ CONFIG_PM
> these days?
Embedded people, I guess. The problem here is that if we are gonna
support !CONFIG_PM configuration and try to reduce the kernel/module
images size for such case, we end up sprinkling #ifdef's
Hi!
> [cc'ing Pavel and linux-kernel, hello]
>
> Original thread can be read from
>
> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ide/16475
>
> Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > Tejun Heo wrote:
> >> Some LLDs were missing scsi device PM callbacks while having host/port
> >> suspend support. Add missing ones.
[cc'ing Pavel and linux-kernel, hello]
Original thread can be read from
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ide/16475
Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Tejun Heo wrote:
>> Some LLDs were missing scsi device PM callbacks while having host/port
>> suspend support. Add missing ones.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Teju
5 matches
Mail list logo
