Re: [patch] x86: make UV support configurable

[Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>]

* Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de> wrote:

> Fixed the EFI omission since the last patch. I have not changed the 
> Kconfig to include (what I think are) false dependencies (which really 
> frustrate me when things get badly tangled up). If people want to test 
> as much stuff as possible even that is not supported by their hardware, 
> we have allyesconfig/allmodconfig. I don't think UV is particularly 
> special in that respect (we allow Intel, AMD, etc CPUs to be configured 
> out)
> 
> If anything, X86_UV should *select* MAXSMP, rather than the other way 
> around. That would be more logical, but even then I don't like adding 
> still a false dep because one might have a small UV system, or want to 
> test with different NR_CPUS.
> 
> Anyway, I think this patch is good as-is. If someone wants to streamline 
> config options with subsequent patches, that's great. If Ingo can be 
> convinced of a better arrangement, fine.

Applied to tip/x86/uv, thanks Nick!

	Ingo