On Sat, 2010-06-12 at 00:00 +0800, Len Brown wrote: > On Fri, 11 Jun 2010, Zhang Rui wrote: > > > > > Introduce driver/acpi/sysfs.c, which contains the code for ACPI sysfs I/F. > > > > Remove driver/acpi/debug.c in this patch, > > the code for ACPI debug sysfs I/F is moved to driver/acpi/sysfs.c. > > > > No function change in this patch. > > > > Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@xxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > drivers/acpi/Makefile | 2 > > drivers/acpi/debug.c | 198 -------------------------------------------------- > > drivers/acpi/sysfs.c | 196 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > 3 files changed, 197 insertions(+), 199 deletions(-) > > > > Index: linux-2.6/drivers/acpi/Makefile > > =================================================================== > > --- linux-2.6.orig/drivers/acpi/Makefile > > +++ linux-2.6/drivers/acpi/Makefile > > @@ -39,7 +39,7 @@ acpi-y += pci_root.o pci_link.o pci_i > > acpi-y += power.o > > acpi-y += system.o event.o > > acpi-y += debugfs.o > > -acpi-$(CONFIG_ACPI_DEBUG) += debug.o > > +acpi-y += sysfs.o > > I do like the name change. > > But here you are moving things from CONFIG_ACPI_DEBUG, to enabled always. > No, we have #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI_DEBUG in sysfs.c, for the ACPI debug sysfs I/F. So I don't think this is a problem. :) thanks, rui > Are debug_layer and debug_level useful when CONFIG_ACPI_DEBUG=n? > thanks, > Len Brown, Intel Open Source Technology Center > > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
