Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 17:47:21 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>
Cc: Erez Zadok <ezk@cs.sunysb.edu>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
       Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arch/x86/kernel/setup_64.c compile error
 (MMOTM-2007-11-10-19-05)
Message-Id: <20071112174721.c304264d.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
In-Reply-To: <200711130232.29900.ak@suse.de>
References: <200711112234.lABMYo0n004269@agora.fsl.cs.sunysb.edu>
	<20071112172841.b4dc21b5.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
	<200711130232.29900.ak@suse.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1062
Lines: 25

On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 02:32:29 +0100 Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de> wrote:

> 
> > hm, that doesn't seem right.  We want to run the early quirks on non-ACPI
> > kernel too, surely?
> 
> Most of early-quirks.c makes only sense with ACPI. The only exception would
> be the ATI timer override check, but frankly it's fairly unlikely that there 
> are any ATI based boards around who still have mptables. Non ACPI 
> tables would very likely just run in PIC mode and then need no timer overrides
> anyways.
> 
> Originally on i386 the early quirks equivalent was 100% ACPI specific.
> 

OK....  But what's The Right Thing To Do here?  Would one be reasonable in
expecting that one can add a new early quirk which is independent from acpi
and have it still work on non-acpi builds?

Seems better to decouple the two things if poss?
-
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/