From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Andrei Petrov <andrei.petrov@veritas.com>
Subject: Re: CONFIG_SMP or !CONFIG_SMP... that is the question.
	WAS: something about ia64 that nobody would read :-)
Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 14:02:15 -0700
Message-ID: <20050511210215.GA7043@ezzy.veritas.com>
References: <516F50407E01324991DD6D07B0531AD542CAEC@cacexc12.americas.cpqcorp.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <516F50407E01324991DD6D07B0531AD542CAEC@cacexc12.americas.cpqcorp.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
To: "Magenheimer, Dan (HP Labs Fort Collins)" <dan.magenheimer@hp.com>
Cc: xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On Wed, May 11, 2005 at 12:46:08PM -0700, Magenheimer, Dan (HP Labs Fort Collins) wrote:
> 
> Granted, turning off SMP on Xen/x86 doesn't even compile right
> now, but that should be fixable.
> 
> So... opinions anyone?  Is keeping CONFIG_SMP (potentially) useful
> or not?

Depends on target application area, if xen will be used in appliances or
embedded systems, or laptops (think QOS, securi1y) then keeping CONFIG_SMP
(!CONFIG_SMP even) would be an advantage for the project.

--Andrei