From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751473Ab3BJF6c (ORCPT ); Sun, 10 Feb 2013 00:58:32 -0500 Received: from mail-ve0-f169.google.com ([209.85.128.169]:54820 "EHLO mail-ve0-f169.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750915Ab3BJF6a (ORCPT ); Sun, 10 Feb 2013 00:58:30 -0500 From: Len Brown To: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: pm_idle cleanup patch series Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2013 00:58:07 -0500 Message-Id: <1360475903-30007-1-git-send-email-lenb@kernel.org> X-Mailer: git-send-email 1.8.1.3.535.ga923c31 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Use of (pm_idle)() spread from x86 to a number of architectures. Some used it like x86, but most copied it for no functional reason. There is no Linux architecture-independent code that mandates that an architecture supply a pm_idle(). So we delete it from pm.h and we either remove it or re-name it to be private to each architecture. It is a safe bet that I fat-fingered something in this series. Please send me an Ack if you can build/test or I broke your favorite machine. In particular, for those with computer museums, I'd like help testing the APM patch, which is compile-tested only. thanks, Len Brown, Intel Open Source Technology Center