Re: [PATCH] move pm_power_off and pm_idle declaration to common code

> > So move declaration of pm_power_off (and with it pm_idle) from the
> > archs that do define it to kernel/sys.c.  This should fix the link
> > problem, and at the same time remove some duplication.
> 
> Sounds sane.  
> 
> Does powerpc still build?  A key question is how do we handle architectures
> that always want to want to call machine_power_off.

I didn't (and can't) check, but it should.  IIRC multiple declaration
of a variable is OK, as long as at most one has an initializer.

Miklos
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [PATCH] move pm_power_off and pm_idle declaration to common code
    • From: Andreas Schwab <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] move pm_power_off and pm_idle declaration to common code
    • From: [email protected] (Eric W. Biederman)

• References:
  • [PATCH] move pm_power_off and pm_idle declaration to common code
    • From: Miklos Szeredi <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] move pm_power_off and pm_idle declaration to common code
    • From: [email protected] (Eric W. Biederman)

• Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] move pm_power_off and pm_idle declaration to common code
• Next by Date: Re: CX8800 driver and 2.6.15-RC2
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] move pm_power_off and pm_idle declaration to common code
• Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] move pm_power_off and pm_idle declaration to common code
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]