[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120331165401.GD2450@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2012 09:54:01 -0700
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-alpha@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
uclinux-dist-devel@...ckfin.uclinux.org,
linux-hexagon@...r.kernel.org, linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org,
linux-m32r@...linux-m32r.org, linux-m32r-ja@...linux-m32r.org,
linux-mips@...ux-mips.org, linux-am33-list@...hat.com,
linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, linux-sh@...r.kernel.org,
sparclinux@...r.kernel.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
linux@....linux.org.uk, dhowells@...hat.com, jejb@...isc-linux.org,
linux390@...ibm.com, x86@...nel.org, cmetcalf@...era.com,
linux-m68k <linux-m68k@...ts.linux-m68k.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] Simplify the Linux kernel by reducing its state space
On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 06:40:30PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 18:33, Paul E. McKenney
> <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> > Although there have been numerous complaints about the complexity of
> > parallel programming (especially over the past 5-10 years), the plain
> > truth is that the incremental complexity of parallel programming over
> > that of sequential programming is not as large as is commonly believed.
> > Despite that you might have heard, the mind-numbing complexity of modern
> > computer systems is not due so much to there being multiple CPUs, but
> > rather to there being any CPUs at all. In short, for the ultimate in
> > computer-system simplicity, the optimal choice is NR_CPUS=0.
> >
> > This commit therefore limits kernel builds to zero CPUs. This change
> > has the beneficial side effect of rendering all kernel bugs harmless.
> > Furthermore, this commit enables additional beneficial changes, for
> > example, the removal of those parts of the kernel that are not needed
> > when there are zero CPUs.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
> > ---
> >
> > alpha/Kconfig | 11 ++++++-----
> > arm/Kconfig | 6 +++---
> > blackfin/Kconfig | 3 ++-
> > hexagon/Kconfig | 9 +++++----
> > ia64/Kconfig | 9 +++++----
> > m32r/Kconfig | 10 ++++++----
> > mips/Kconfig | 21 +++++++++++----------
> > mn10300/Kconfig | 3 ++-
> > parisc/Kconfig | 6 +++---
> > powerpc/platforms/Kconfig.cputype | 8 ++++----
> > s390/Kconfig | 12 +++++++-----
> > sh/Kconfig | 11 ++++++-----
> > sparc/Kconfig | 8 ++++----
> > tile/Kconfig | 9 +++++----
> > x86/Kconfig | 16 +++++++++-------
> > 15 files changed, 78 insertions(+), 64 deletions(-)
>
> You forgot to fix half of the architectures, a.o. m68k?
I must confess that I fixed only the SMP-capable architectures.
I of course would welcome additions for UP-only architectures.
Thanx, Paul
--
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