From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752756AbYLZBJU (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Dec 2008 20:09:20 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752143AbYLZBJG (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Dec 2008 20:09:06 -0500 Received: from e1.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.141]:39675 "EHLO e1.ny.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752063AbYLZBJD (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Dec 2008 20:09:03 -0500 Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2008 11:23:32 -0800 From: "Paul E. McKenney" To: Sam Ravnborg Cc: Ingo Molnar , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de, akpm@linux-foundation.org, ralf@linux-mips.org, kernel@wantstofly.org, hskinnemoen@atmel.com, cooloney@kernel.org, tony.luck@intel.com, geert@linux-m68k.org, zippel@linux-m68k.org, jwboyer@linux.vnet.ibm.com, mporter@kernel.crashing.org, grant.likely@secretlab.ca, paulus@samba.org, benh@kernel.crashing.org, dhowells@redhat.com, yasutake.koichi@jp.panasonic.com, lethal@linux-sh.org, hpa@zytor.com Subject: Re: [PATCH -tip] Switch arm defconfig files from CONFIG_CLASSIC_RCU to CONFIG_TREE_RCU. Message-ID: <20081225192332.GI6912@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Reply-To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com References: <1229991147545-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <12299911471985-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20081223142542.GC29151@elte.hu> <20081225083611.GA14968@elte.hu> <20081225093301.GB27896@uranus.ravnborg.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20081225093301.GB27896@uranus.ravnborg.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.15+20070412 (2007-04-11) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Dec 25, 2008 at 10:33:01AM +0100, Sam Ravnborg wrote: > On Thu, Dec 25, 2008 at 09:36:11AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > below is the fix for another small buglet that hits architectures that do > > not include kernel/Kconfig.preempt. > > What is needed to let all architectures include Kconfig.preempt? > We should not advertise preemption if not supported, > but we could do this by a simple Kconfig symbol: > > config HAVE_PREEMPT > bool > > And let all architectures that supports preemption do: > > config "ARCH" > select HAVE_PREEMPT > > But maybe there is a simpler solution The idea being to make things like PREEMPT then depend on HAVE_PREEMPT? Seems reasonable to me, but I cannot claim to understand the relationship of Kconfig and the various arches very well. Thanx, Paul