Re: [2.6 patch] let X86_VOYAGER depend on SMP

Adrian Bunk <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> I noted that X86_VOYAGER=y and SMP=n doesn't compile.
> 
> It might be possible to fix this, but as far as I understand it, all 
> Voyager machines are SMP, implying that such a configuration doesn't 
> make much sense.

I was kinda waiting for James to express an opinion.  In theory it'd be
better to make uniproc-on-Voyager build, boot and run like the wind.

In practice, this patch looks practical ;)
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [2.6 patch] let X86_VOYAGER depend on SMP
  - From: James Bottomley <[email protected]>

References:
- [2.6 patch] let X86_VOYAGER depend on SMP
  - From: Adrian Bunk <[email protected]>

Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH 1/2 (repost)] mm: serialize OOM kill operations
Next by Date: Re: [2.6 patch] let X86_VOYAGER depend on SMP
Previous by thread: [2.6 patch] let X86_VOYAGER depend on SMP
Next by thread: Re: [2.6 patch] let X86_VOYAGER depend on SMP
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Index of Archives] [Kernel Newbies] [Netfilter] [Bugtraq] [Photo] [Stuff] [Gimp] [Yosemite News] [MIPS Linux] [ARM Linux] [Linux Security] [Linux RAID] [Video 4 Linux] [Linux for the blind] [Linux Resources]