Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 20 Feb 2006 18:48:02 +0100 | From | Adrian Bunk <> | Subject | Re: [2.6 patch] some fixups for the X86_NUMAQ dependencies |
| |
On Mon, Feb 20, 2006 at 09:39:38AM -0800, Martin J. Bligh wrote: > >>>config X86_NUMAQ > >>> bool "NUMAQ (IBM/Sequent)" > >>>+ select SMP > >>> select NUMA > >>> help > >>> This option is used for getting Linux to run on a (IBM/Sequent) > >>> NUMA > >>>@@ -419,6 +420,7 @@ > >> > >>Surely NUMA should select SMP, not NUMA-Q? > > > >NUMA depends on SMP. > > > >Therefore, if you select NUMA, you have to ensure that SMP is enabled. > > Yes. but that should link SMP -> NUMA -> NUMA-Q, not SMP directly to > NUMA-Q, surely?
The problem is that a select bypasses the dependencies of the select'ed symbol.
> >NUMAQ can't be hidden since it doesn't has any dependencies. > >And this isn't what this comment is talking about (note the the > >comment is only shown if NUMAQ was already select'ed). > > > >NUMAQ didn't fulfill the contract that when select'ing NUMA, it has to > >ensure the dependencies of NUMA are fulfilled. My patch solves this > >properly instead of telling the user through a comment that he ran into > >this bug. > > Yes, if that works, it's much cleaner. Perhaps we just had insufficient > config-fu to figure it out ... it looks good - I suppose I'd better test > it, and make sure we don't hit the same thing we did before.
:-)
> m.
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
- 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/
| |