Re: [PATCH] change CONFIG_NUMA description


* Pekka Enberg <penberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi Ingo,

On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 10:53 AM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> wrote:
From fd51b2d7d5df932767b89e00d0871a38a2c53e74 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2008 02:27:19 +0900
Subject: [PATCH] x86: update CONFIG_NUMA description

Impact: clarify/update CONFIG_NUMA text

CONFIG_NUMA description talk about a bit old thing.
So, following changes are better.

o CONFIG_NUMA is no longer EXPERIMENTAL

o Opteron is not the only processor of NUMA topology on x86_64 no longer,
but also Intel Core7i has it.

Signed-off-by: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx>
---
arch/x86/Kconfig | 16 ++++++++++------
1 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/Kconfig b/arch/x86/Kconfig
index 350bee1..38ae04b 100644
--- a/arch/x86/Kconfig
+++ b/arch/x86/Kconfig
@@ -951,22 +951,26 @@ config ARCH_PHYS_ADDR_T_64BIT

# Common NUMA Features
config NUMA
- bool "Numa Memory Allocation and Scheduler Support (EXPERIMENTAL)"
+ bool "Numa Memory Allocation and Scheduler Support"
depends on SMP
depends on X86_64 || (X86_32 && HIGHMEM64G && (X86_NUMAQ || X86_BIGSMP || X86_SUMMIT && ACPI) && EXPERIMENTAL)

Why does this depend on CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL still?

Good point, i've just removed that too. 32-bit NUMA used to have
stability problems (nobody really tested it systematically), but we've
fixed those bugs and can now remove the restrictions in v2.6.29.

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

Relevant Pages