On Thu, Nov 15, 2007 at 07:42:55PM +0100, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
quoted text
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2007 at 07:07:11PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Thu, 15 Nov 2007, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> > 
> > > On Thu, Nov 15, 2007 at 05:17:03PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > > > The x86 unification resulted in CONFIG_X86_HT no longer being
> > > > set if (X86_32 && MK8).
> > > Yup - my bad. I wrongly assumed MK8 was an X86_64 thing.
> > > 
> > > Thanks for fixing this.
> > > > 
> > > > After grep'ing through the tree I think the problem is that different 
> > > > places have different assumptions about the semantics of CONFIG_X86_HT,
> > > > either:
> > > > - hyperthreading or
> > > > - multicore
> > > > and the SCHED_SMT and SCHED_MC dependencies are just one of the 
> > > > symptoms.
> > > > 
> > > > This should be sorted out properly, but until then we should keep the 
> > > > 2.6.23 status quo.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk <bunk@kernel.org>
> > > Acked-by: Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>
> > > 
> > > I assume Thomas & Co will forward the patch.
> > 
> > After looking what does what and fixing it. 
> > 
> > Right now this patch is not a 1:1 replacement of the .23 status quo,
> > as it now makes SCHED_SMT and SCHED_HT depend on !MK8 for 64bit.
> 
> I assumed this was intentional - Adrian?

No, it was just buggy...

quoted text
> 	Sam

cu
Adrian

-- 

       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed

-
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/