* Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > * Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Okay, I can delay this way: > > > > > > 2.6.39: > > > feature-removal.txt targets 2.6.42 removal > > > depend on CONFIG_EXPERT > > > > > > 2.6.40, 2.6.41: > > > WARN once on run-time access > > > > > > 2.6.42: > > > remove. > > > > Regardless of removal, i'd suggest a "this code is not supported" kind of > > WARN() message to the APM code today, into .39 - to see whether it pops up > > anywhere - and mark it for -stable as well. > > > > .42 removal might be too fast, considering the typical release schedule of > > Linux distributions. [...] > > Anyway, i'd ack this schedule if you queued up the WARN() today with a -stable > tag, on the condition that if we get complaints about that message, we keep APM > support. s/today/for .39 Thanks, Ingo _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
