From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1762295AbZATQHD (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Jan 2009 11:07:03 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1759705AbZATQGo (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Jan 2009 11:06:44 -0500 Received: from mx3.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.1.138]:39819 "EHLO mx3.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759050AbZATQGn (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Jan 2009 11:06:43 -0500 Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2009 17:06:37 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: Jack Steiner Cc: Nick Piggin , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [patch] x86: make UV support configurable Message-ID: <20090120160637.GB32650@elte.hu> References: <20090120033604.GF16304@wotan.suse.de> <20090120142733.GD10224@elte.hu> <20090120155000.GA27200@elte.hu> <20090120155334.GB225848@sgi.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090120155334.GB225848@sgi.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamScore: -1.5 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-1.5 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.3 -1.5 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Jack Steiner wrote: > 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. that's not expressed in the Kconfig rules. Ingo