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

> A key question is how do we handle architectures
> that always want to want to call machine_power_off.

One common way to handle a generic default with possible arch specific
overrides is with #ifdef symbols.  Surround the generic definition with
something like "#ifndef ARCH_HAS_PM_POWER_OFF", and let the arch's that
want something other than the default define that preprocessor symbol
as well.

-- 
                  I won't rest till it's the best ...
                  Programmer, Linux Scalability
                  Paul Jackson <[email protected]> 1.925.600.0401
-
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/

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: [PATCH] uml: fix pm_power_off link failure
Next by Date: Re: 2.6.15-rc5-mm1
Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] move pm_power_off and pm_idle declaration to common code
Next by thread: [PATCH] uml: fix pm_power_off link failure
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]