Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S964992AbVJ0IcX (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Oct 2005 04:32:23 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S964997AbVJ0IcX (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Oct 2005 04:32:23 -0400 Received: from ns1.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:38045 "EHLO mx1.suse.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964992AbVJ0IcW (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Oct 2005 04:32:22 -0400 From: Andi Kleen To: Magnus Damm Subject: Re: [discuss] [rfc] x86_64: Kconfig changes for NUMA Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 10:31:15 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.8 Cc: discuss@x86-64.org, Ravikiran G Thirumalai , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Shai Fultheim (Shai@scalex86.org)" References: <20051026070956.GA3561@localhost.localdomain> <200510270950.13268.ak@suse.de> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200510271031.15403.ak@suse.de> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 768 Lines: 18 On Thursday 27 October 2005 10:25, Magnus Damm wrote: > > But if the same logic is applied to the NUMA code, why then is there > both k8topology.c and srat.c? Does non-ACPI systems exist in x86_64 > land? Historical reasons. The first AMD NUMA systems indeed didn't have SRAT and before ACPI 3.0 was released there were some concerns about the Microsoft license of SRAT. So k8topology was implemented as a stopgap. The long term plan is to get rid of it though once the ACPI code has been proven completely stable. -Andi - 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/