On Thu, 27 Sep 2007, Dave Jones wrote:

quoted text
> 'noacpi' isn't a standalone parameter, give it its prefix.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt b/Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt
> index 4d175c7..a87bc58 100644
> --- a/Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt
> @@ -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.

-- 
========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day
Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry
Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA

http://crashcourse.ca
========================================================================
-
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/