[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1001120823120.17145@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2010 08:26:22 -0800 (PST)
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
cc: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>,
Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>,
"ananth@...ibm.com" <ananth@...ibm.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/4] x86: use dmi check to treat disabled cpus as
hotplug cpus.
On Tue, 12 Jan 2010, Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu wrote:
>
> OK, I'll bite - how do you build an X86-64 kernel that doesn't have
> CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU selected? Try as I might, even if I have PM_SLEEP=n,
> PM_SLEEP_SMP insists on being set, and then selecting HOTPLUG_SMP.
If that is true, then there is some bug in the kconfig parser.
PM_SLEEP_SMP depends on PM_SLEEP, so with PM_SLEEP=n it should never be
set.
That said, regardless of any such problems, I do think that we should
think about splitting up HOTPLUG_CPU into two config options: one that
allows CPU's to be put to sleep (which is common, and needed for any
suspend/hibernate support), and one that actually has support for actual
physical hotplugging.
Linus
--
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