On Tue, Feb 08, 2011 at 01:44:32AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > On Mon, 7 Feb 2011 14:18:29 +0000 Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Do you mean that these systems require CONFIG_PM be turned off, or just > > that people tend not to turn it on? If the latter would you expect any > > ill effects from doing so? > I don't know the answer to either question without testing. All I am > saying is that currently the default for CONFIG_PM is "off" and you are > changing it to be "on" and there may not have been any testing done of > that in some situations. We don't know where it was explicitly > turned off any more since we shrank our defconfig files (which was done > automatically) ... since it is off by default, it doesn't need to be > mentioned in a defconfig unless it needs to be turned on. My suspicion would be that it'll have been turned off by someone hitting return through a config upgrade rather than through deliberate effort. On the other hand if it is essential for some machines to have it disabled they probably want to have somethnig in Kconfig. _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
