Re: [PATCH] x86 NUMA panic compile error

Ingo Molnar
2006-05-15T18:29:01Z

* Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> wrote:

> > (which has nothing to do with x86_64 anyway)
>
> True.
>
> I guess the concern here is that we don't want people building these
> frankenkernels and then sending us bug reports against them.

sure - lets simply turn it into a printk, as per the patch below.

it's not like we are being swamped with these bugreports, it seems i was
the only one who tried. So lets not over-react it. (and the panic was
the worst possible thing we could do.)

Ingo

---

warn users that running CONFIG_NUMA on non-x440 boxes is barely tested.

Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>

arch/i386/kernel/srat.c | 9 +++------
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

Index: linux/arch/i386/kernel/srat.c
===================================================================
--- linux.orig/arch/i386/kernel/srat.c
+++ linux/arch/i386/kernel/srat.c
@@ -267,12 +267,9 @@ int __init get_memcfg_from_srat(void)
int i = 0;

extern int use_cyclone;
- if (use_cyclone == 0) {
- /* Make sure user sees something */
- static const char s[] __initdata = "Not an IBM x440/NUMAQ. Don't use i386 CONFIG_NUMA anywhere else."
- early_printk(s);
- panic(s);
- }
+ /* Make sure user sees something */
+ if (use_cyclone == 0)
+ printk(KERN_WARN "WARNING: Not an IBM x440/NUMAQ and CONFIG_NUMA enabled!\n");

if (ACPI_FAILURE(acpi_find_root_pointer(ACPI_PHYSICAL_ADDRESSING,
rsdp_address))) {