From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1761443AbZATPxo (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Jan 2009 10:53:44 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756263AbZATPxg (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Jan 2009 10:53:36 -0500 Received: from relay3.sgi.com ([192.48.171.31]:47401 "EHLO relay.sgi.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755772AbZATPxf (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Jan 2009 10:53:35 -0500 Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2009 09:53:34 -0600 From: Jack Steiner To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Nick Piggin , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [patch] x86: make UV support configurable Message-ID: <20090120155334.GB225848@sgi.com> References: <20090120033604.GF16304@wotan.suse.de> <20090120142733.GD10224@elte.hu> <20090120155000.GA27200@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090120155000.GA27200@elte.hu> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 04:50:00PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > * Nick Piggin 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! > > hm, build failure with the attached config: > > > drivers/built-in.o: In function `gru_cpu_fault_map_id': > : undefined reference to `per_cpu____uv_hub_info' > drivers/built-in.o: In function `gru_fault': > : undefined reference to `per_cpu____uv_hub_info' > drivers/built-in.o: In function `gru_try_dropin': > grufault.c:(.text+0xbfc6e): undefined reference to > `per_cpu____uv_hub_info' > grufault.c:(.text+0xc0042): undefined reference to > `per_cpu____uv_hub_info' > [...] > > (if possible please send a delta fix on top of your previous patch.) The GRU driver makes sense only on UV & IA64 configurations. --- jack