RE: [2.6 patch] let IA64_GENERIC select more stuff

Chen, Kenneth W
2006-02-08T02:58:42Z

Keith Owens wrote on Tuesday, February 07, 2006 6:48 PM
> >You patch does more than what you described and is wrong. Selecting
> >platform type should not be tied into selecting SMP nor should it tied
> >with processor type, nor should it tied with ARCH_FLATMEM_ENABLE. All
> >of them are orthogonal and independent.
>
> Blame me for the SMP bit. I have a dim, distant memory that Intel
> required all IA64 boxes to be SMP, but I could be wrong. Also it is
> almost pointless to do a generic build which pulls in NUMA etc.,
> without also including SMP.

I'm not disagreeing with the SMP bit. In my very first reply, I
disagree with the hunk that disable CONFIG_MCKINLEY for CONFIG_IA64_GENERIC.
People tends to mix the terminology, CONFIG_IA64_GENERIC is a
platform type choice, it is a sub-requirement for building a
kernel that boots everywhere. People keeps on promoting the
config option.

- Ken

Excerpt from earlier email:

> --- linux-2.6.16-rc1-mm5-ia64/arch/ia64/Kconfig.old
> +++ linux-2.6.16-rc1-mm5-ia64/arch/ia64/Kconfig
> @@ -132,10 +134,11 @@
> This choice is safe for all IA-64 systems, but may not perform
> optimally on systems with, say, Itanium 2 or newer processors.
>
> config MCKINLEY
> bool "Itanium 2"
> + depends on IA64_GENERIC=n
> help
> Select this to configure for an Itanium 2 (McKinley) processor.
>
> endchoice
>

This hunk does not make any logical sense. Select generic system type
does not mean Itanium processor is the only choice I can have. What's
wrong with having an option that works just fine right now?