From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 15 Jan 2003 13:29:42 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 15 Jan 2003 13:29:42 -0500 Received: from franka.aracnet.com ([216.99.193.44]:54734 "EHLO franka.aracnet.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 15 Jan 2003 13:29:41 -0500 Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 10:37:30 -0800 From: "Martin J. Bligh" To: "Pallipadi, Venkatesh" , "Protasevich, Natalie" cc: William Lee Irwin III , "Nakajima, Jun" , Christoph Hellwig , James Cleverdon , Linux Kernel Subject: RE: [PATCH] (0/7) Finish moving NUMA-Q into subarch, cleanup Message-ID: <949530000.1042655849@titus> In-Reply-To: References: X-Mailer: Mulberry/2.2.1 (Linux/x86) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > Can these (MAX_IO_APICS, MAX_APICS) be moved to sub-arch too, instead of Not easily, at least not without creating a circular dependency problem. Try it ;-) I guess we chould create another subarch header file just for these if we really have to, but that seem like overkill. If you can come up with a clean patch (check it compiles on uniproc with and without IO/APIC turned on, and standard SMP as well), I'd really be interested to see it ... would be most helpful > replacing CONFIG NUMA by CONFIG NUMAQ? Actually replacing CONFIG_X86_NUMA with CONFIG_NUMA ... and we could do (CONFIG_NUMA || CONFIG_BIGSMP) instead. But you're right, subarch would be much better if you can find a way. M.