On Tue, 2008-08-12 at 22:49 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Tuesday, 12 of August 2008, Matt Helsley wrote: > > Now that the TIF_FREEZE flag is available in all architectures, > > extract the refrigerator() and freeze_task() from kernel/power/process.c > > and make it available to all. > > > > The refrigerator() can now be used in a control group subsystem > > implementing a control group freezer. > > > > Signed-off-by: Cedric Le Goater <clg@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Matt Helsley <matthltc@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Acked-by: Serge E. Hallyn <serue@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Tested-by: Matt Helsley <matthltc@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Your Signed-off-by implies your Tested-by (at least it should ;-)). I wasn't sure that was always true so I added it just in case. I'll take it out of any future postings. > > --- > [--snip--] > > Index: linux-2.6.27-rc1-mm1/kernel/power/Kconfig > > =================================================================== > > --- linux-2.6.27-rc1-mm1.orig/kernel/power/Kconfig > > +++ linux-2.6.27-rc1-mm1/kernel/power/Kconfig > > @@ -85,6 +85,9 @@ config PM_SLEEP > > depends on SUSPEND || HIBERNATION || XEN_SAVE_RESTORE > > default y > > > > +config FREEZER > > + def_bool PM_SLEEP > > + > > I'd still prefer this to go into a Kconfig in the parent directory (ie. where > freezer.c and the Makefile building it are located). Otherwise it's guaranteed > to confuse someone. I'm thinking of making a patch moving the cgroups config variables into a kernel/Kconfig.cgroups file. Would moving config FREEZER to such a file be satisfactory? Paul, what do you think? Cheers, -Matt Helsley _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
