James Bottomley <[email protected]> writes:
> On Mon, 2006-07-10 at 21:42 -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> But I do agree the subarch header files are clean.
>> And no this case except for the fact no one realized that the
>> code doesn't even compile on voyager does not show how brittle
>> the x86 subarch code is. Except for the fact that it seems
>> obvious that kernel/smp.c is generic code that every smp subarch
>> would use.
>
> OK ... that's the mistaken assumption. kernel/smp.c is not subarch
> generic, it's APIC specific. So all apic using subarchs, which is
> pretty much everything except voyager, use it. Since voyager uses
> vic/qic based smp harness, it has its own version of this file (in fact
> voyager has a completely separate SMP HAL).
Yep. My point is that with the current subarch structure on x86 it is
really easy to make mistaken assumptions like kernel/smp.c applies to
all x86 subarchitectures, because the lines are not clear. The
architectures where I have seen that the lines are clear generally
allow for building a single kernel that can boot on any subarch.
My hope is that we can recognized how non-obvious the x86 subarch code
is so that future work will be able to improve the situation.
To give credit I do think the division of labor between the subarch's
appears sound. I just don't like how the subarches are glued together
into the x86 arch.
Eric
-
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/
[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]
