On Thu, May 09, 2013 at 01:38:36PM -0400, Alan Stern wrote: > On Thu, 9 May 2013, Guenter Roeck wrote: > > > The following patch series introduces a marker for power management > > functions > > and data. This this marker, #ifdef CONFIG_PM and #ifdef CONFIG_PM_SLEEP > > can be removed from most of the code. This ensures that the conditional code > > still compiles but is not included in the object file. > > > > As a side effect, drivers declaring struct dev_pm_ops unconditionally > > get a bit smaller if CONFIG_PM_SLEEP is not configured. > > What about code that depends on CONFIG_PM_RUNTIME? Or code that > depends on CONFIG_PM_SLEEP but not on CONFIG_PM_RUNTIME? > Should we also introduce __pm_sleep and __pm_runtime ?
Thanks, Guenter -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
