Subject: Re: [linux-pm] linux-next: Tree for May 6 (acpi: PM=n)

From: James Morris <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 7 May 2010 09:27:49 +1000 (EST)

On Thu, 6 May 2010, Randy Dunlap wrote:

> On Thu, 06 May 2010 16:26:13 -0400 (EDT) Len Brown wrote:
> 
> > > When CONFIG_PM is not set:
> > > 
> > > drivers/built-in.o: In function `acpi_init':
> > > bus.c:(.init.text+0x2d84): undefined reference to `pm_flags'
> > > bus.c:(.init.text+0x2d91): undefined reference to `pm_flags'
> > 
> > CONFIG_ACPI depends on CONFIG_PM,
> > so acpi/bus.c should not be compiled for CONFIG_PM=n
> > 
> > Hmm, is is somebody doing something strange, like "select ACPI"
> > without guaranteeing that all of ACPI's dependencies are satisfied?
> 
> Oh, thanks for the clue.
> 
> That would be a patch that I commented on and was ignored,
> but James Morris merged it anyway.  Now it should be dropped.
> 
> http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/5/4/379

You weren't ignored.  Mimi responded and mentioned a subsequent patch, 
after which, there was no further discussion.

I've reverted:

b89e66e1e396f7b5436af154e58209320cc08aed
"TPM: ACPI/PNP dependency removal"

a674fa46c79ffa37995bd1c8e4daa2b3be5a95ae
"ima: remove ACPI dependency"

Note: any further ACPI-related changes here should have acks from 
linux-acpi folk.

- James
-- 
James Morris
<[email-masked]>