[git pull] ia64 changes

[git pull] ia64 changes

[Luck, Tony]

Hi Linus,

please pull from:

	git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/aegl/linux-2.6.git release

This will update the files shown below. Both changes touch kernel/sched.c
to fix regressions ... one for a build problem, the other for a boot
problem.

Thanks!

-Tony

 kernel/sched.c |    7 +------
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

Mike Travis (1):
      Build fix for CONFIG_NUMA=y && CONFIG_SMP=n

Russ Anderson (1):
      [IA64] fix bootmem regression on Altix

Re: [git pull] ia64 changes

[Adrian Bunk]

On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 04:51:01PM -0700, Luck, Tony wrote:
>...
> Mike Travis (1):
>       Build fix for CONFIG_NUMA=y && CONFIG_SMP=n
>...

Why is this an allowed configuration on ia64?

cu
Adrian

-- 

       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed

RE: [git pull] ia64 changes

[Luck, Tony]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8", Size: 632 bytes --]

>>       Build fix for CONFIG_NUMA=y && CONFIG_SMP=n
>>...
>
> Why is this an allowed configuration on ia64?

It shows up in allnoconfig ... probably because some
bit of Kconfig forces NUMA=y.

I can't imagine that it is ever a useful combination ... except to
find places in the code where people have:

#if defined(CONFIG_SMP)
 ...
#else

#if defined(CONFIG_NUMA) // !!! SMP=n, NUMA code???
  ...
#endif
#endif


Which is what happened, and is being fixed, here.

-Tony
ÿôèº{.nÇ+‰·Ÿ®‰­†+%ŠËÿ±éݶ\x17¥Šwÿº{.nÇ+‰·¥Š{±þG«éÿŠ{ayº\x1dʇڙë,j\a­¢f£¢·hšïêÿ‘êçz_è®\x03(­éšŽŠÝ¢j"ú\x1a¶^[m§ÿÿ¾\a«þG«éÿ¢¸?™¨è­Ú&£ø§~á¶iO•æ¬z·švØ^\x14\x04\x1a¶^[m§ÿÿÃ\fÿ¶ìÿ¢¸?–I¥

[2.6 patch] ia64: let NUMA select SMP

[Adrian Bunk]

On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 05:25:06PM -0700, Luck, Tony wrote:
> >>       Build fix for CONFIG_NUMA=y && CONFIG_SMP=n
> >>...
> >
> > Why is this an allowed configuration on ia64?
> 
> It shows up in allnoconfig ... probably because some
> bit of Kconfig forces NUMA=y.

allnoconfig results in CONFIG_IA64_GENERIC=y, which in turn selects NUMA.

What about the patch below instead?

> I can't imagine that it is ever a useful combination ... except to
> find places in the code where people have:
> 
> #if defined(CONFIG_SMP)
>  ...
> #else
> 
> #if defined(CONFIG_NUMA) // !!! SMP=n, NUMA code???
>   ...
> #endif
> #endif
> 
> 
> Which is what happened, and is being fixed, here.

If it isn't a useful combination such code makes no sense.

> -Tony

cu
Adrian


<--  snip  -->


CONFIG_NUMA=y, CONFIG_SMP=n isn't a useful combination, so let NUMA 
select SMP.

Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk <bunk@kernel.org>

---
a94d43a82a3c5a95c82b9688e5adebca6dcb7acb diff --git a/arch/ia64/Kconfig b/arch/ia64/Kconfig
index cd13e13..19e8167 100644
--- a/arch/ia64/Kconfig
+++ b/arch/ia64/Kconfig
@@ -387,6 +387,7 @@ config NUMA
 	bool "NUMA support"
 	depends on !IA64_HP_SIM && !FLATMEM
 	default y if IA64_SGI_SN2
+	select SMP
 	select ACPI_NUMA if ACPI
 	help
 	  Say Y to compile the kernel to support NUMA (Non-Uniform Memory

RE: [2.6 patch] ia64: let NUMA select SMP

[Luck, Tony]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8", Size: 795 bytes --]

> CONFIG_NUMA=y, CONFIG_SMP=n isn't a useful combination, so let NUMA 
> select SMP.

Yup.  That looks good.  Means that my allnoconfig will now
have SMP=y though :-(  Root of that is selecting GENERIC,
and I'm not sure there is a better choice.

Doesn't change the need for the patch to delete the #if NUMA
clause inside the SMP=n path though (your patch would make my
build work by forcing SMP=y ... so the build error would go
away ... but that doesn't make it OK to have #if NUMA code
inside the SMP=n clause).

This does make we wonder how much dead code is hidden inside
impossibly nested #ifdefs elsewhere in the kernel.

-Tony
ÿôèº{.nÇ+‰·Ÿ®‰­†+%ŠËÿ±éݶ\x17¥Šwÿº{.nÇ+‰·¥Š{±þG«éÿŠ{ayº\x1dʇڙë,j\a­¢f£¢·hšïêÿ‘êçz_è®\x03(­éšŽŠÝ¢j"ú\x1a¶^[m§ÿÿ¾\a«þG«éÿ¢¸?™¨è­Ú&£ø§~á¶iO•æ¬z·švØ^\x14\x04\x1a¶^[m§ÿÿÃ\fÿ¶ìÿ¢¸?–I¥

Re: [2.6 patch] ia64: let NUMA select SMP

[Mike Travis]

Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 05:25:06PM -0700, Luck, Tony wrote:
>>>>       Build fix for CONFIG_NUMA=y && CONFIG_SMP=n
>>>> ...
>>> Why is this an allowed configuration on ia64?
>> It shows up in allnoconfig ... probably because some
>> bit of Kconfig forces NUMA=y.
> 
> allnoconfig results in CONFIG_IA64_GENERIC=y, which in turn selects NUMA.
> 
> What about the patch below instead?
> 
>> I can't imagine that it is ever a useful combination ... except to
>> find places in the code where people have:

Though highly unlikely, it is possible to have multiple memory nodes
without having multiple cpus -- at least in theory.  In this specific
case it's nonsensical because the scheduler is grouping cpus by node.

Thanks,
Mike

>>
>> #if defined(CONFIG_SMP)
>>  ...
>> #else
>>
>> #if defined(CONFIG_NUMA) // !!! SMP=n, NUMA code???
>>   ...
>> #endif
>> #endif
>>
>>
>> Which is what happened, and is being fixed, here.
> 
> If it isn't a useful combination such code makes no sense.
> 
>> -Tony
> 
> cu
> Adrian
> 
> 
> <--  snip  -->
> 
> 
> CONFIG_NUMA=y, CONFIG_SMP=n isn't a useful combination, so let NUMA 
> select SMP.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk <bunk@kernel.org>
> 
> ---
> a94d43a82a3c5a95c82b9688e5adebca6dcb7acb diff --git a/arch/ia64/Kconfig b/arch/ia64/Kconfig
> index cd13e13..19e8167 100644
> --- a/arch/ia64/Kconfig
> +++ b/arch/ia64/Kconfig
> @@ -387,6 +387,7 @@ config NUMA
>  	bool "NUMA support"
>  	depends on !IA64_HP_SIM && !FLATMEM
>  	default y if IA64_SGI_SN2
> +	select SMP
>  	select ACPI_NUMA if ACPI
>  	help
>  	  Say Y to compile the kernel to support NUMA (Non-Uniform Memory
>