From: Tomas Szepe <szepe@pinerecords.com>
To: Patrick Mochel <mochel@osdl.org>
Cc: Ducrot Bruno <poup@poupinou.org>, lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [TRIVIAL] sanitize power management config menus, take two
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2003 18:51:17 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20030805165117.GH18982@louise.pinerecords.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0308050946030.23977-100000@cherise>
> [mochel@osdl.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.
>
> Actually, it does:
>
> ./arch/arm/kernel/Makefile:obj-$(CONFIG_PM) += pm.o
> ./arch/arm/mach-pxa/Makefile:obj-$(CONFIG_PM) += pm.o sleep.o
> ./arch/arm/mach-sa1100/Makefile:obj-$(CONFIG_PM) += pm.o sleep.o
> ./arch/i386/kernel/Makefile:obj-$(CONFIG_PM) += suspend.o
> ./drivers/pci/Makefile:obj-$(CONFIG_PM) += power.o
> ./kernel/Makefile:obj-$(CONFIG_PM) += pm.o power/
>
> But, I agree with your change anyway.
Trouble is, the same goes for ACPI -- it doesn't require that CONFIG_PM
code be present.
I think the correct x86 solution would be to introduce a real dummy
option for the menus, and imply CONFIG_PM if APM or swsusp (the two
options that seem to actually need CONFIG_PM code) is enabled.
--
Tomas Szepe <szepe@pinerecords.com>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-08-05 16:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-08-05 7:26 [TRIVIAL] sanitize power management config menus, take two Tomas Szepe
2003-08-05 16:11 ` Ducrot Bruno
2003-08-05 16:15 ` Tomas Szepe
2003-08-05 16:24 ` Ducrot Bruno
2003-08-05 16:26 ` Tomas Szepe
2003-08-05 16:36 ` Tomas Szepe
2003-08-05 16:48 ` Patrick Mochel
2003-08-05 16:51 ` Tomas Szepe [this message]
2003-08-05 17:01 ` Tomas Szepe
2003-08-05 17:47 ` Patrick Mochel
2003-08-05 17:46 ` Tomas Szepe
2003-08-06 9:20 ` Ducrot Bruno
2003-08-06 13:06 ` Pavel Machek
2003-08-05 16:55 ` Ducrot Bruno
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-08-05 7:43 John Bradford
2003-07-27 12:18 Tomas Szepe
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20030805165117.GH18982@louise.pinerecords.com \
--to=szepe@pinerecords.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mochel@osdl.org \
--cc=poup@poupinou.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).