Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754645AbYC3UXY (ORCPT ); Sun, 30 Mar 2008 16:23:24 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753316AbYC3UXQ (ORCPT ); Sun, 30 Mar 2008 16:23:16 -0400 Received: from rv-out-0910.google.com ([209.85.198.189]:65308 "EHLO rv-out-0910.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753302AbYC3UXP (ORCPT ); Sun, 30 Mar 2008 16:23:15 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=DMvRNX2lqzl8KbXoziABdY+5f1UVX2uctlrPCwv5tRhPfCDmyiXo2oYIvgfvxjidSryaraxyIeibv1QKkHRG91VyQC3x4P4fuVef6LVYH4bpluYDV5BssfvZYqeimT80C9X2VO1zzyZNnIaxl7dqGHEC7gapz26HZyt8vqZZGr4= Message-ID: <86802c440803301323q5c4bd4f4k1f9bdc1d6b1a0a7b@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 13:23:12 -0700 From: "Yinghai Lu" To: "Ingo Molnar" Subject: Re: [RFC 8/8] x86_64: Support for new UV apic Cc: "Jack Steiner" , "Andi Kleen" , tglx@linutronix.de, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20080326073823.GD3442@elte.hu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20080324182122.GA28327@sgi.com> <87abknhzhd.fsf@basil.nowhere.org> <20080325175657.GA6262@sgi.com> <20080326073823.GD3442@elte.hu> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1230 Lines: 31 On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 12:38 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Jack Steiner wrote: > > > > > - obj-y += genapic_64.o genapic_flat_64.o > > > > + obj-y += genapic_64.o genapic_flat_64.o genx2apic_uv_x.o > > > > > > Definitely should be a CONFIG > > > > Not sure that I understand why. The overhead of UV is minimal & we > > want UV enabled in all distro kernels. OTOH, small embedded systems > > probably want to eliminate every last bit of unneeded code. > > > > Might make sense to have a config option. Thoughts???? > > i wouldnt mind having UV enabled by default (it can be a config option > but default-enabled on generic kernels so all distros will pick this hw > support up), but we definitely need the genapic unification before we > can add more features. config option would be reasonable. for x86_64 subarch already have X86_PC, X86_VSMP. we have X86_UVSMP YH -- 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/