Re: [VOYAGER] fix build broken by shift to smp_ops

Andrew Morton
2007-05-14T20:38:00Z

On Mon, 14 May 2007 13:02:42 -0700
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org> wrote:

> Andrew Morton wrote:
> > Does "that" have name? I can find no patch in -mm which appears to have
> > anything to do with SMP consolidation, and this patch applies cleanly to
> > the current -mm lineup.
> >
> Sorry, I thought you'd picked this up:
>
>
> Subject: i386: move common parts of smp into their own file
>
> Several parts of kernel/smp.c and smpboot.c are generally useful for
> other subarchitectures and paravirt_ops implementations, so make them
> available for reuse.

Confused. This patch conflicts a lot with James's one (which I named
voyager-fix-build-broken-by-shift-to-smp_ops.patch).

If your "i386: move common parts of smp into their own file" also fixes
Voyager and is preferred then cool, but a) the changelog should tell us
that and b) could James please test it?