Re: [PATCH] PM: Hide CONFIG_PM from users

2011-02-08 Thread Rafael J. Wysocki
On Tuesday, February 08, 2011, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: On Tue, Feb 08, 2011 at 12:05:40AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: On Monday, February 07, 2011, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: On Mon, Feb 07, 2011 at 11:00:03PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: On Monday, February 07, 2011, Dmitry Torokhov

Re: [PATCH] PM: Hide CONFIG_PM from users

2011-02-08 Thread Mark Brown
On Mon, Feb 07, 2011 at 05:17:59PM -0800, Ray Lee wrote: On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 7:49 AM, Mark Brown I'm rather hoping that they'll notice the mailing list thread or that someone else who knows what's going on with them does Surely you're joking. I mean, do _you_ scan every message that

Re: [PATCH] PM: Hide CONFIG_PM from users

2011-02-08 Thread Mark Brown
On Mon, Feb 07, 2011 at 06:52:00PM -0800, Frank Rowand wrote: On 02/07/11 04:22, Mark Brown wrote: Since having the configuration option requires non-zero effort to maintain, with ifdefery in most drivers, but it is used with vanishing rarity it is simpler to just remove the option.

Re: [PATCH] PM: Hide CONFIG_PM from users

2011-02-08 Thread Paul Mundt
On Tue, Feb 08, 2011 at 12:05:40AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: On Monday, February 07, 2011, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: More of an observation for your (b) justification. I'd probably force CONFIG_PM to always 'y'w while we weeding references to it from drivers... We simply can't force

[PATCH] PM: Hide CONFIG_PM from users

2011-02-07 Thread Mark Brown
It is very rare to find a current system which is both sufficiently resource constrained to want to compile out power management support and sufficiently power insensitive to be able to tolerate doing so. Since having the configuration option requires non-zero effort to maintain, with ifdefery in

Re: [PATCH] PM: Hide CONFIG_PM from users

2011-02-07 Thread Ingo Molnar
* Mark Brown broo...@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com wrote: It is very rare to find a current system which is both sufficiently resource constrained to want to compile out power management support and sufficiently power insensitive to be able to tolerate doing so. Since having the configuration

Re: [PATCH] PM: Hide CONFIG_PM from users

2011-02-07 Thread Mark Brown
On Mon, Feb 07, 2011 at 01:48:46PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: * Mark Brown broo...@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com wrote: Since having the configuration option requires non-zero effort to maintain, with ifdefery in most drivers, but it is used with vanishing rarity it is simpler to just remove

Re: [PATCH] PM: Hide CONFIG_PM from users

2011-02-07 Thread Stephen Rothwell
Hi Mark, On Mon, 7 Feb 2011 12:22:15 + Mark Brown broo...@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com wrote: diff --git a/kernel/power/Kconfig b/kernel/power/Kconfig index 2657299..99e3c52 100644 --- a/kernel/power/Kconfig +++ b/kernel/power/Kconfig @@ -1,23 +1,6 @@ config PM - bool Power

Re: [PATCH] PM: Hide CONFIG_PM from users

2011-02-07 Thread Stephen Rothwell
Hi Mark, On Mon, 7 Feb 2011 14:18:29 + Mark Brown broo...@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com wrote: On Tue, Feb 08, 2011 at 01:13:24AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: On Mon, 7 Feb 2011 12:22:15 + Mark Brown broo...@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com wrote: + bool + default y if

Re: [PATCH] PM: Hide CONFIG_PM from users

2011-02-07 Thread Mark Brown
On Tue, Feb 08, 2011 at 01:44:32AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: On Mon, 7 Feb 2011 14:18:29 + Mark Brown broo...@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com wrote: Do you mean that these systems require CONFIG_PM be turned off, or just that people tend not to turn it on? If the latter would you

Re: [PATCH] PM: Hide CONFIG_PM from users

2011-02-07 Thread Geert Uytterhoeven
On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 15:50, Mark Brown broo...@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com wrote: On Tue, Feb 08, 2011 at 01:44:32AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: On Mon, 7 Feb 2011 14:18:29 + Mark Brown broo...@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com wrote: Do you mean that these systems require CONFIG_PM be

Re: [PATCH] PM: Hide CONFIG_PM from users

2011-02-07 Thread Mark Brown
On Tue, Feb 08, 2011 at 02:19:16AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: At least some of the powerpc defconfigs were added with CONFIG_PM disabled. I assume that was on purpose (though it may not have been). I'd not be so sure - since it's a bool without an explicit default set Kconfig will default

Re: [PATCH] PM: Hide CONFIG_PM from users

2011-02-07 Thread Mark Brown
On Mon, Feb 07, 2011 at 10:36:31AM -0500, Alan Stern wrote: On Mon, 7 Feb 2011, Mark Brown wrote: I'd not be so sure - since it's a bool without an explicit default set Kconfig will default to disabling it and if anything enabling it is the option that requires special effort. This may

Re: [PATCH] PM: Hide CONFIG_PM from users

2011-02-07 Thread Rafael J. Wysocki
On Monday, February 07, 2011, Mark Brown wrote: It is very rare to find a current system which is both sufficiently resource constrained to want to compile out power management support and sufficiently power insensitive to be able to tolerate doing so. Since having the configuration option

Re: [PATCH] PM: Hide CONFIG_PM from users

2011-02-07 Thread Mark Brown
On Mon, Feb 07, 2011 at 08:14:03PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: On Monday, February 07, 2011, Mark Brown wrote: config PM_DEBUG bool Power Management Debug Support I think it would be better to simply rename CONFIG_PM_OPS into CONFIG_PM. That still leaves the IA64 emulator to

Re: [PATCH] PM: Hide CONFIG_PM from users

2011-02-07 Thread Mark Brown
On Mon, Feb 07, 2011 at 08:46:48PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: On Monday, February 07, 2011, Mark Brown wrote: On Mon, Feb 07, 2011 at 08:14:03PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: I think it would be better to simply rename CONFIG_PM_OPS into CONFIG_PM. That still leaves the IA64

Re: [PATCH] PM: Hide CONFIG_PM from users

2011-02-07 Thread Rafael J. Wysocki
On Monday, February 07, 2011, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: On Mon, Feb 07, 2011 at 10:15:59PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: On Monday, February 07, 2011, Mark Brown wrote: Yeah, but some people seem very keen on removing the pointers to the PM ops entirely when CONFIG_PM is disabled which

Re: [PATCH] PM: Hide CONFIG_PM from users

2011-02-07 Thread Dmitry Torokhov
On Mon, Feb 07, 2011 at 11:00:03PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: On Monday, February 07, 2011, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: On Mon, Feb 07, 2011 at 10:15:59PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: On Monday, February 07, 2011, Mark Brown wrote: Yeah, but some people seem very keen on removing

Re: [PATCH] PM: Hide CONFIG_PM from users

2011-02-07 Thread Rafael J. Wysocki
On Monday, February 07, 2011, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: On Mon, Feb 07, 2011 at 11:00:03PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: On Monday, February 07, 2011, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: On Mon, Feb 07, 2011 at 10:15:59PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: On Monday, February 07, 2011, Mark Brown wrote: