On Sunday, 29 July 2007 12:20, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Saturday, 28 July 2007 20:31, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > > On Sat, 28 Jul 2007, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > > > > OK, I'll prepare a patch to introduce CONFIG_SUSPEND, but that will require > > > quite a bit of (compilation) testing on different architectures. > > > > Sure. I'm not too worried, the fallout should be of the trivial kind. > > > > Also, mind basing it on the (independent) cleanups that Adrian already > > sent out. This is all intertwined.. > > OK, it took more time than I had hoped, but I wanted CONFIG_HIBERNATION and > CONFIG_SUSPEND to be really independent of each other. > > The two patches in the next messages implement the idea: > * replace CONFIG_SOFTWARE_SUSPEND with CONFIG_HIBERNATION > * introduce CONFIG_SUSPEND that selects CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU, if necessary, > and make it possible to choose suspend and hibernation independently of each > other. Unfortunately, the patches that I have posted are against 2.6.23-rc1 with the suspend and hibernation patchset applied (http://www.sisk.pl/kernel/hibernation_and_suspend/2.6.23-rc1/patches/) . Sorry for that. The corresponding patches on top of the current -git are in the next two messages. They do the following: * replace CONFIG_SOFTWARE_SUSPEND with CONFIG_HIBERNATION * introduce CONFIG_SUSPEND that selects CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU, if necessary, and make it possible to choose suspend and hibernation independently of each other * update the top-level PM-related headers and the ACPI code related to suspend and hibernation to use the new definitions Greetings, Rafael _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
