From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759910AbZA2XYz (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Jan 2009 18:24:55 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754990AbZA2XYr (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Jan 2009 18:24:47 -0500 Received: from hera.kernel.org ([140.211.167.34]:35298 "EHLO hera.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753533AbZA2XYr (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Jan 2009 18:24:47 -0500 Message-ID: <49823A85.2000908@kernel.org> Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2009 15:23:49 -0800 From: Yinghai Lu User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (X11/20081227) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ingo Molnar CC: Randy Dunlap , Thomas Gleixner , "H. Peter Anvin" , Andrew Morton , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: allow 8 more cpus could be used References: <49822B1D.9070708@kernel.org> <20090129224236.GD1465@elte.hu> <49823166.4010702@oracle.com> <20090129231259.GB29611@elte.hu> <49823869.4010406@oracle.com> <20090129232207.GC30601@elte.hu> In-Reply-To: <20090129232207.GC30601@elte.hu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Randy Dunlap wrote: > >> Ingo Molnar wrote: >>> * Randy Dunlap wrote: >>> >>>> Ingo Molnar wrote: >>>>> * Yinghai Lu wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Impact: fix left out MARCO >>>>>> >>>>>> X86_PC will be always enabled. so need to check if we have bigsmp >>>>>> support built in before cut off more than 8 cpus. >>>>> ah, that's a leftover reference to X86_PC. It can now be removed, together >>>>> with the Kconfig X86_PC option. >>>>> >>>>>> -#if defined(CONFIG_X86_PC) && defined(CONFIG_X86_32) >>>>>> +#if defined(CONFIG_X86_PC) && !defined(CONFIG_X86_BIGSMP) >>>>>> if (def_to_bigsmp && nr_cpu_ids > 8) { >>>>>> unsigned int cpu; >>>>>> unsigned nr; >>>>> Could you please send a patch that removes both X86_PC and X86_BIGSMP - >>>>> and removes the above cutoff code too, so that it will be built-in all the >>>>> time? >>>> and at what cost, please? >>> the size difference between a bigsmp and a normal-smp x86 defconfig kernel >>> is 0.011%. Zero difference on a UP kernel. (And UP is what most of the >>> ultra-embedded systems are using) >> That's static size? how about cpu and apic table space? > > What do you mean? What is your point and what is your exact question? > it seems he still want to use mach-default direct without apic-> involoved. YH