Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1762139AbYG3OZz (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Jul 2008 10:25:55 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752797AbYG3OZr (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Jul 2008 10:25:47 -0400 Received: from relay1.sgi.com ([192.48.171.29]:47805 "EHLO relay.sgi.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752741AbYG3OZr (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Jul 2008 10:25:47 -0400 Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2008 09:25:45 -0500 From: Dimitri Sivanich To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Peter Zijlstra , Ingo Molnar Subject: CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU on x86 Message-ID: <20080730142545.GA25835@sgi.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 653 Lines: 14 I've heard folks say that hotplug cpu is very reliable. I'm assuming that's in the context of the x86 architecture. If so, how come CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU is still listed as EXPERIMENTAL in arch/x86/Kconfig? Should this be changed for the x86 architecture? config HOTPLUG_CPU bool "Support for suspend on SMP and hot-pluggable CPUs (EXPERIMENTAL)" depends on SMP && HOTPLUG && EXPERIMENTAL && !X86_VOYAGER -- 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/