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]