Re: [PATCH} x86_64 PM_TRACE support.

[Nigel Cunningham]

Hi.

On Wed, 2007-05-30 at 17:09 -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> > On Sat, May 26, 2007 at 04:32:54PM +1000, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> > 
> > Hi Nigel,
> > 
> >  > As promised I took another look at the patch and at what Randy had
> >  > prepared to fix the IA64 compilation error. I did some more work on it,
> >  > and believe that the following is the tidiest correct solution I can
> >  > come up with. It differs from the version that caused the compilation
> >  > error primarily in that:
> >  > 
> >  > * the #include <asm/resume-trace.h> is inside the #ifdef 
> >  >   CONFIG_PM_TRACE.
> >  > * now-unnecessary protection for multiple #includes and ifdef testing of
> >  >   CONFIG_PM_TRACE in the asm code were removed.
> >  > * do-nothing definitions for !PM_TRACE restored to
> >  >   include/linux/resume-trace.h.
> >  > 
> >  > We're therefore depending upon kernel/power/Kconfig having the right
> >  > depends condition. As far as I can see, IA64 doesn't define CONFIG_X86.
> >  > Is that correct, or do we need to have (X86 && !IA64)?
> > 
> > Can you post a copy of this that isn't mangled by quoted-printable encoding?
> > Whilst it looks fine in my MUA, the diff ends up looking like..
> 
> yep :(
> 
> http://www.xenotime.net/linux/patches/x8664-pm-trace-support.patch
> 
> in case Nigel is asleep.

Thanks Randy. I wasn't asleep, but was out for most of the day.

> > I'm beginning to think we really need a Documentation/Unhorking-MUAs-HOWTO
> > judging by the amount of broken encodings we seem to get to lkml these days.

That would be good. I just took a look through evo's settings, but can't
find whatever option is set wrong. I think it's devolved on me :\.

Regards,

Nigel

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part