Subject: Re: [PATCH] linux-2.5.69_subarch-fix_A0.patch
From: john stultz <johnstul@us.ibm.com>
To: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>
Cc: lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@digeo.com>,
       "Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@aracnet.com>,
       keith maanthey <kmannth@us.ibm.com>
In-Reply-To: <20030515172855.GA10831@Wotan.suse.de>
References: <1052966228.9630.69.camel@w-jstultz2.beaverton.ibm.com>
	 <20030515065120.GA3469@Wotan.suse.de>
	 <1053019259.9630.91.camel@w-jstultz2.beaverton.ibm.com>
	 <20030515172855.GA10831@Wotan.suse.de>
Content-Type: text/plain
Organization: 
Message-Id: <1053020763.9629.104.camel@w-jstultz2.beaverton.ibm.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: 15 May 2003 10:46:03 -0700
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1132
Lines: 30

On Thu, 2003-05-15 at 10:28, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > You did get around it in the generic subarch (which I love, by the way,
> > thanks so much for doing that work), but in a roundabout way. (via
> > #ifdef APIC_DEFINITION trickery). 
> 
> The best fix is probably to just remove the summit selection and replace
> it with the generic architecture.

I'd agree (long term even more strongly), although along with that I'd
like to be able to pick and choose my subarch. So I can have a kernel
that supports say, PC and BigSMP, but not NUMAQ or whatever. I believe
this is doable with your infrastructure, but I'm not sure how much work
it will take. 

And before we make any larger changes, I'd like to just get stuff
compiling first (Keith's apic patch landing about the same time and
broke generic, and generic broke summit so right now neither subarch
builds properly). 

thanks
-john


-
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/