From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S272871AbTHEQhC (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Aug 2003 12:37:02 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S272872AbTHEQhC (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Aug 2003 12:37:02 -0400 Received: from louise.pinerecords.com ([213.168.176.16]:46755 "EHLO louise.pinerecords.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S272871AbTHEQhA (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Aug 2003 12:37:00 -0400 Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2003 18:36:48 +0200 From: Tomas Szepe To: Ducrot Bruno Cc: lkml Subject: Re: [TRIVIAL] sanitize power management config menus, take two Message-ID: <20030805163648.GG18982@louise.pinerecords.com> References: <20030805072631.GC5876@louise.pinerecords.com> <20030805161117.GA1511@poupinou.org> <20030805161505.GD18982@louise.pinerecords.com> <20030805162428.GB1511@poupinou.org> <20030805162604.GF18982@louise.pinerecords.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030805162604.GF18982@louise.pinerecords.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > [szepe@pinerecords.com] > > > [poup@poupinou.org] > > > > > o only enable cpufreq options if power management is selected > > > o don't put cpufreq options in a separate submenu > > > > Yes, but what I do not understand is why cpufreq need power management. > > Because it is a power management option. :) > > CONFIG_PM is a dummy option, it does not link any code into the kernel > by itself. Ooops, I ain't right. :) There actually seems to be code that depends on CONFIG_PM, particularly so on arches other that x86, so the 'depends on PM' clause for cpufreq is indeed bogus. Thanks for pointing this out, I'll post a fixed patch. -- Tomas Szepe