From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: RFD: Does CONFIG_X86_LOCAL_APIC still make sense?
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2013 08:20:02 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131011062002.GC4975@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <52573279.9020404@zytor.com>
* H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> wrote:
> I'm trying to wrap my head around if there are use cases where disabling
> either CONFIG_X86_UP_APIC or CONFIG_X86_LOCAL_APIC would ever make sense
> anymore.
>
> I am guessing there are probably some small number of embedded systems
> which still don't have LAPICs, but is it a significant number and does
> anyone care for new kernels? We are not talking about discontinuing
> support for non-APIC configurations, just the configuration option.
I guess it depends on the kernel size difference. If it's more than just a
few K then a patch will creep back via some CONFIG_EXPERT "reduce kernel
bloat" route.
The thing is, if we allow non-apic configurations then we have paid most
of the modularization, #ifdef and general maintenance price already.
Adding a Kconfig just makes it more testable and breakages more apparent.
Unless I missed some aspects of this that would allow us to simplify code
significantly that is.
Thanks,
Ingo
prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-10-11 6:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-10-10 23:04 RFD: Does CONFIG_X86_LOCAL_APIC still make sense? H. Peter Anvin
2013-10-11 6:20 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20131011062002.GC4975@gmail.com \
--to=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).