> [mochel@osdl.org]
>
> > > > o only enable cpufreq options if power management is selected
> > > > o don't put cpufreq options in a separate submenu
> > >
> > > Yes, but what I do not understand is why cpufreq need power management.
> >
> > Because it is a power management option. :)
> >
> > CONFIG_PM is a dummy option, it does not link any code into the kernel
> > by itself.
>
> Actually, it does:
>
> ./arch/arm/kernel/Makefile:obj-$(CONFIG_PM) += pm.o
> ./arch/arm/mach-pxa/Makefile:obj-$(CONFIG_PM) += pm.o sleep.o
> ./arch/arm/mach-sa1100/Makefile:obj-$(CONFIG_PM) += pm.o sleep.o
> ./arch/i386/kernel/Makefile:obj-$(CONFIG_PM) += suspend.o
> ./drivers/pci/Makefile:obj-$(CONFIG_PM) += power.o
> ./kernel/Makefile:obj-$(CONFIG_PM) += pm.o power/
>
> But, I agree with your change anyway.
Trouble is, the same goes for ACPI -- it doesn't require that CONFIG_PM
code be present.
I think the correct x86 solution would be to introduce a real dummy
option for the menus, and imply CONFIG_PM if APM or swsusp (the two
options that seem to actually need CONFIG_PM code) is enabled.
-- Tomas Szepe <szepe@pinerecords.com> - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Aug 07 2003 - 22:00:29 EST