Quick summary - attached patch to 2.3.49-pre2:
1) fixes broken parport placement as previous patchlet did
2) backs out asking user the CONFIG_PM bool since
a) ACPI can be used regardless of power management
b) no need to bother the user since it's very simple to
check on our own (just like we don't bother asking
the user CONFIG_X86_GOOD_APIC explicitly)
[ Wednesday, March 1, 2000 ] Jeff Garzik wrote:
> James Manning wrote:
> > part of 2.3.49-pre2 moved the "source drivers/parport/Config.in" call
> > such that parallel port support went under the main menu in menuconfig
> > instead of in general setup... if this was intentional (I can't see why,
> > though) and I missed the discussion, my apologies.
>
> It kept into my patch by accident.. Can we keep it that way, though?
You want to *intentionally* make it the only item in the main menu that's
not a menu itself? That makes no sense to me. :) I think the placement
of parport was a simple enough accident, you just put it outside of the
general setup "endmenu" (only a few lines off) so it ended up in the
main menu :)
> It seems to me that the parport drivers might in the future depend on
> CONFIG_PM either directly or indirectly, and that CONFIG_PM should
> always be fairly high up in arch/xxx/config.in.
Trust me when I say that nothing so key as a parallel port will ever
force you to have power management turned on. Ever. :) There is simply
far too may broken machines/BIOSes that will never get power management
right for such key functionality to be dependent on. Not to mention my
24x7 servers that happen to run the dept printer too that I don't even
want *thinking* about power management :)
Personally, I'd not bother asking the user to input the CONFIG_PM
bool since 1) only 2 branches underneath it (APM, ACPI) and 2) ACPI is
technically perfectly ok to use just for its configuration capabilities
(it's more than just power management, of course, and putting it under
CONFIG_PM is incorrect IMHO, even if current implementation doesn't use
the full spec capabilities)
If you just need some flag CONFIG_PM that represents whether power
management of some form has been enabled in the kernel (for pm.o inclusion
in kernel/Makefile or as it's used now in drivers/pcmcia/cs.c), it's *far*
simpler (especially to the kernel configuration user) to simply:
if [ "$CONFIG_APM" != "n" -o "$CONFIG_APCI" != "n" ]; then
define_bool CONFIG_PM y
fi
Then (God forbid Linus should accept such a patch :) if you wanted to dep_
parport on CONFIG_PM you could do so just as easily.
patch is attached :)
James
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Mar 07 2000 - 21:00:09 EST