On Wed, 30 May 2007 20:01:34 -0400 Dave Jones 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. > 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. --- ~Randy *** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code *** - 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/
