On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 22:17:04 -0700 Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I'm a bit surprised that this change appears to have no > configurability. If one has set CONFIG_PM=n (for example), shouldn't > it all go away? I suppose it's a matter of taste, but at least personally I believe that userspace exposed ABI's shouldn't be configurable as a starting point (if the code delta is 100's of kilobytes it's a different topic); what point is talking about a stable ABI if it's there or not half the time... that's the ultimate instability. _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
