From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Adrian Bunk Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 18:25:46 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH] ia64: change defconfig to NR_CPUS==1024 Message-Id: <20060106182546.GX12131@stusta.de> List-Id: References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: "Luck, Tony" Cc: Matthew Wilcox , Arjan van de Ven , hawkes@sgi.com, Tony Luck , Andrew Morton , linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jack Steiner , Dan Higgins , John Hesterberg , Greg Edwards On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 09:45:20AM -0800, Luck, Tony wrote: > >Why can't we keep the default below 64? Surely the 0.1% of the market > >which needs more than 64 cpus can recompile their kernel ... > > I suppose that depends on your expectations from defconfig. In my > mind its the one that builds into a kernel that will boot and run > on just about any box. People who want to get a bit of extra performance > will do the re-compilation to strip out the bits that they don't want > and tune down limits that are set higher than they need. I only > ever boot a defconfig kernel to check that it still works, my systems > all run tiger_defconfig/zx1_defconfig based most of the time. But > perhaps I'm the weird one? >... defconfig's are usually not intended for running on all supported machines, they are more a base for compile-tests and a starting point for building an own configuration. If you intend to use the ia64 defconfig in a different way I don't see any strong point against it. But if you seriously want a defconfig "that builds into a kernel that will boot and run on just about any box", please change your defconfig to ITANIUM=y,MCKINLEY=n. "People who want to get a bit of extra performance" can still change their configuration to omit support for the original Itanium. > -Tony cu Adrian -- "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days. "Only a promise," Lao Er said. Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed