Re: [2.6 patch] let X86_VOYAGER depend on SMP

On Thu, 2006-04-27 at 16:06 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Adrian Bunk <[email protected]> wrote:
> 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.

I do have making uniprocessor build work on my todo list.  There are
actually a surprising number of non-smp machines out their (mainly
3360s).

James


-
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/

---

• References:
  • [2.6 patch] let X86_VOYAGER depend on SMP
    • From: Adrian Bunk <[email protected]>
  • Re: [2.6 patch] let X86_VOYAGER depend on SMP
    • From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [2.6 patch] let X86_VOYAGER depend on SMP
• Next by Date: Re: Simple header cleanups
• Previous by thread: Re: [2.6 patch] let X86_VOYAGER depend on SMP
• Next by thread: [2.6 patch] remove the obsolete IDEPCI_FLAG_FORCE_PDC
• 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]