[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20080418200414.16dbe916.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 20:04:14 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Mike Travis <travis@....com>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: x86: clean up non-smp usage of cpu maps
On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 19:21:50 -0700 Mike Travis <travis@....com> wrote:
> Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 17:36:55 GMT Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> >> x86: clean up non-smp usage of cpu maps
> >>
> >> Cleanup references to the early cpu maps for the non-SMP configuration
> >> and remove some functions called for SMP configurations only.
> >>
> >> ...
> >>
> >> index 1179aa0..dc79409 100644
> >> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/setup.c
> >> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/setup.c
> >> @@ -10,7 +10,7 @@
> >> #include <asm/setup.h>
> >> #include <asm/topology.h>
> >>
> >> -#ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_SETUP_PER_CPU_AREA
> >> +#if defined(CONFIG_HAVE_SETUP_PER_CPU_AREA) && defined(CONFIG_SMP)
> >
> > This implies that we can have
> >
> > CONFIG_HAVE_SETUP_PER_CPU_AREA && !CONFIG_SMP
> >
> > which a) appears to be true and b) seems rather dumb?
>
> Yeah, I kind of picked that up in a code merge and didn't really look at it
> too closely. I should have checked the Kconfig file to make sure that it
> couldn't inadvertently get set if SMP is not set.
config HAVE_SETUP_PER_CPU_AREA
def_bool X86_64 || (X86_SMP && !X86_VOYAGER)
it _can_ get set at present on x86_64, which I assume is incorrect.
--
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