Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 28 May 2003 18:14:26 -0700 | From | William Lee Irwin III <> | Subject | Re: Linux 2.5.70 compile error |
| |
At some point in the past, my attribution was stripped from: >> (1) APIC vs. xAPIC >> (2) clustered hierarchical DFR vs. flat DFR >> (3) physical DESTMOD vs. logical DESTMOD in IO-APIC RTE's >> (4) wakeup via INIT or via NMI >> (5) physical IPI's or logical IPI's >> So one could easily form destinations by:
On Wed, May 28, 2003 at 08:28:09AM -0700, Martin J. Bligh wrote: > Yes. It's fixable, and I think that's a good project for 2.7, but I really > don't think that level of change is justified at the moment. Testing this > stuff is a pain in the ass, it's a lot of work to do properly and carefully. > And what does that change buy us in reality? Not a lot. > I agree it would be nice to do ... just not the focus during a 2.6 > stabilisation effort, when we have so many other more important things to > work on, that would have real impact.
Yes, it's 2.7 material.
-- wli - 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/
| |