Skip to contentSkip to conversation

correct kernel parameter in documentation.

PATCH Applied Dave Jones 4 participants 4 messages Sep 27, 2007 – Sep 29, 2007

Subsystems (2)
Documentation libata
lore
Share & tools
lore

Dave Jones

author
#0 lore raw

'noacpi' isn't a standalone parameter, give it its prefix.

Signed-off-by Dave Jones <[email protected]>
Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt +4 -4
index 4d175c7..a87bc58 100644
@@ -863,6 +863,10 @@ and is between 256 and 4096 characters. It is defined in the file
 	lasi=		[HW,SCSI] PARISC LASI driver for the 53c700 chip
 			Format: addr:<io>,irq:<irq>
 
+	libata.noacpi	[LIBATA] Disables use of ACPI in libata suspend/resume
+			when set.
+			Format: <int>
+
 	load_ramdisk=	[RAM] List of ramdisks to load from floppy
 			See Documentation/ramdisk.txt.
 

@@ -1079,10 +1083,6 @@ and is between 256 and 4096 characters. It is defined in the file
 			emulation library even if a 387 maths coprocessor
 			is present.
 
-	noacpi		[LIBATA] Disables use of ACPI in libata suspend/resume
-			when set.
-			Format: <int>
-
 	noaliencache	[MM, NUMA, SLAB] Disables the allocation of alien
 			caches in the slab allocator.  Saves per-node memory,
 			but will impact performance.
Signature · 1 line
http://www.codemonkey.org.uk
#1 lore raw
Quoted 9 lines · Dave Jones

'noacpi' isn't a standalone parameter, give it its prefix.

Signed-off-by Dave Jones <[email protected]>
Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt +0 -0
index 4d175c7..a87bc58 100644

Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt and is between 256 and 4096 characters. It is defined in the file · line 869

Quoted 7 lines
Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt +4 -0
@@ -863,6 +863,10 @@ and is between 256 and 4096 characters. It is defined in the file
 	lasi=		[HW,SCSI] PARISC LASI driver for the 53c700 chip
 			Format: addr:<io>,irq:<irq>
 
+	libata.noacpi	[LIBATA] Disables use of ACPI in libata suspend/resume
+			when set.
+			Format: <int>
+

if you're going to add that libata-related parm to the kernel parms file, wouldn't it make sense for consistency to add the other available boot-time parms from libata-core.c as well? it seems counter-productive to document only a subset of them from the same source file.

rday

p.s. as i think i've mentioned before, i'd prefer to see that entire kernel-parameters.txt file reorganized, where the basic boot time parms are at the top, followed by module specific parameters *after* that, in alphabetical order by module name. i think that would make far more sense.

Signature · 7 lines
========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day
Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry
Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA

http://crashcourse.ca
========================================================================
#2 lore raw
Quoted 5 lines

if you're going to add that libata-related parm to the kernel parms file, wouldn't it make sense for consistency to add the other available boot-time parms from libata-core.c as well? it seems counter-productive to document only a subset of them from the same source file.

He's not adding it - he's correcting a bug