Re: CONFIG_SUSPEND? (was: Re: [GIT PATCH] ACPI patches for 2.6.23-rc1)

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Thursday, 26 July 2007 21:57, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 26 Jul 2007, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > 
> > Hmm, perhaps we should introduce a CONFIG_SUSPEND and change
> > CONFIG_SOFTWARE_SUSPEND into CONFIG_HIBERNATION, both depending on
> > CONFIG_PM?
> > 
> > There's quite some code needed only for suspend compiled in when CONFIG_PM is
> > set ...
> 
> Sounds like a good idea, although I suspect that CONFIG_PM really *is* 
> fairly close to CONFIG_SUSPEND. The thing is, all the stuff it enabled is 
> largely useless without at least STR.

My point is we have ACPI dependent on PM, so if you want ACPI, you end
up with all of the STR stuff built in, which is what you don't like (if I
understand that correctly).  If we have CONFIG_SUSPEND, you'll be able to
choose ACPI alone. :-)

> (Yes, I realize that you can do per-driver suspend events etc, but I 
> suspect not a lot of people have used it).
>
> But from a logical standpoint, it does make sense to have a separate 
> config option for the STR support.

Exactly.

Greetings,
Rafael


-- 
"Premature optimization is the root of all evil." - Donald Knuth
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/