[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130301105954.GB2625@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2013 11:59:54 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: Martin Bligh <mbligh@...igh.org>, Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>,
Don Morris <don.morris@...com>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Tim Gardner <tim.gardner@...onical.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com,
x86@...nel.org, a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl, jarkko.sakkinen@...el.com,
tangchen@...fujitsu.com
Subject: Re: sched: CPU #1's llc-sibling CPU #0 is not on the same node!
* H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com> wrote:
> On 02/25/2013 08:51 PM, Martin Bligh wrote:
> >> Do you mean we can remove numaq x86 32bit code now?
> >
> > Wouldn't bother me at all. The machine is from 1995, end of life c. 2000? Was
> > useful in the early days of getting NUMA up and running on Linux, but is now too
> > old to be a museum piece, really.
>
> I'd be very happy to get the NUMAQ code ripped out. I am wondering if there are
> any reasons to keep any 32-bit x86 NUMA code at all.
Not much I suspect.
Thanks,
Ingo
--
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