[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <45379031.601@yahoo.com.au>
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2006 00:48:17 +1000
From: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>
To: Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>
CC: Daniel Walker <dwalker@...sta.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
johnstul@...ibm.com, mingo@...e.hu, tglx@...utronix.de
Subject: Re: + i386-time-avoid-pit-smp-lockups.patch added to -mm tree
Andi Kleen wrote:
>>An SMP kernel can boot on UP hardware, in which case I think
>>num_possible_cpus() will be 1, won't it?
>
>
> 0 was a typo, i meant 1 for UP of course. 0 would be nonsensical.
Sure, I realised that. For a UP kernel, the test will compile away.
But Daniel seems to say there is dead code that could be compiled
out for SMP kernels. I just don't think that is possible because the
SMP kernel can boot a UP system where num_possible_cpus() is 1.
--
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists