* [2.6 patch] some fixups for the X86_NUMAQ dependencies
@ 2006-02-19 23:26 Adrian Bunk
2006-02-20 16:33 ` Martin J. Bligh
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Adrian Bunk @ 2006-02-19 23:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel
You must always ensure to fulfill the dependencies of what you are
select'ing.
Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de>
---
arch/i386/Kconfig | 7 +++----
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
--- linux-2.6.16-rc3-mm1-full/arch/i386/Kconfig.old 2006-02-20 00:12:50.000000000 +0100
+++ linux-2.6.16-rc3-mm1-full/arch/i386/Kconfig 2006-02-20 00:17:57.000000000 +0100
@@ -84,6 +84,7 @@
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 @@
config NOHIGHMEM
bool "off"
+ depends on !X86_NUMAQ
---help---
Linux can use up to 64 Gigabytes of physical memory on x86 systems.
However, the address space of 32-bit x86 processors is only 4
@@ -455,6 +457,7 @@
config HIGHMEM4G
bool "4GB"
+ depends on !X86_NUMAQ
help
Select this if you have a 32-bit processor and between 1 and 4
gigabytes of physical RAM.
@@ -522,10 +525,6 @@
default n if X86_PC
default y if (X86_NUMAQ || X86_SUMMIT)
-# Need comments to help the hapless user trying to turn on NUMA support
-comment "NUMA (NUMA-Q) requires SMP, 64GB highmem support"
- depends on X86_NUMAQ && (!HIGHMEM64G || !SMP)
-
comment "NUMA (Summit) requires SMP, 64GB highmem support, ACPI"
depends on X86_SUMMIT && (!HIGHMEM64G || !ACPI)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [2.6 patch] some fixups for the X86_NUMAQ dependencies
2006-02-19 23:26 [2.6 patch] some fixups for the X86_NUMAQ dependencies Adrian Bunk
@ 2006-02-20 16:33 ` Martin J. Bligh
2006-02-20 17:08 ` Adrian Bunk
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Martin J. Bligh @ 2006-02-20 16:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Adrian Bunk; +Cc: linux-kernel
Adrian Bunk wrote:
> You must always ensure to fulfill the dependencies of what you are
> select'ing.
>
>
> Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de>
>
> ---
>
> arch/i386/Kconfig | 7 +++----
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> --- linux-2.6.16-rc3-mm1-full/arch/i386/Kconfig.old 2006-02-20 00:12:50.000000000 +0100
> +++ linux-2.6.16-rc3-mm1-full/arch/i386/Kconfig 2006-02-20 00:17:57.000000000 +0100
> @@ -84,6 +84,7 @@
>
> 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?
> config NOHIGHMEM
> bool "off"
> + depends on !X86_NUMAQ
> ---help---
> Linux can use up to 64 Gigabytes of physical memory on x86 systems.
> However, the address space of 32-bit x86 processors is only 4
> @@ -455,6 +457,7 @@
>
> config HIGHMEM4G
> bool "4GB"
> + depends on !X86_NUMAQ
> help
> Select this if you have a 32-bit processor and between 1 and 4
> gigabytes of physical RAM.
> @@ -522,10 +525,6 @@
> default n if X86_PC
> default y if (X86_NUMAQ || X86_SUMMIT)
>
> -# Need comments to help the hapless user trying to turn on NUMA support
> -comment "NUMA (NUMA-Q) requires SMP, 64GB highmem support"
> - depends on X86_NUMAQ && (!HIGHMEM64G || !SMP)
> -
Hmm. ISTR the reason we put that in there in the first place was that
NUMA-Q got mysteriously hidden by other deps before, and it wasn't clear
how to select it. Perhaps we just had some of the deps backwards.
M.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [2.6 patch] some fixups for the X86_NUMAQ dependencies
2006-02-20 16:33 ` Martin J. Bligh
@ 2006-02-20 17:08 ` Adrian Bunk
2006-02-20 17:39 ` Martin J. Bligh
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Adrian Bunk @ 2006-02-20 17:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Martin J. Bligh; +Cc: linux-kernel
On Mon, Feb 20, 2006 at 08:33:07AM -0800, Martin J. Bligh wrote:
> Adrian Bunk wrote:
> >You must always ensure to fulfill the dependencies of what you are
> >select'ing.
> >
> >
> >Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de>
> >
> >---
> >
> > arch/i386/Kconfig | 7 +++----
> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >
> >--- linux-2.6.16-rc3-mm1-full/arch/i386/Kconfig.old 2006-02-20
> >00:12:50.000000000 +0100
> >+++ linux-2.6.16-rc3-mm1-full/arch/i386/Kconfig 2006-02-20
> >00:17:57.000000000 +0100
> >@@ -84,6 +84,7 @@
> >
> > 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.
> > config NOHIGHMEM
> > bool "off"
> >+ depends on !X86_NUMAQ
> > ---help---
> > Linux can use up to 64 Gigabytes of physical memory on x86 systems.
> > However, the address space of 32-bit x86 processors is only 4
> >@@ -455,6 +457,7 @@
> >
> > config HIGHMEM4G
> > bool "4GB"
> >+ depends on !X86_NUMAQ
> > help
> > Select this if you have a 32-bit processor and between 1 and 4
> > gigabytes of physical RAM.
> >@@ -522,10 +525,6 @@
> > default n if X86_PC
> > default y if (X86_NUMAQ || X86_SUMMIT)
> >
> >-# Need comments to help the hapless user trying to turn on NUMA support
> >-comment "NUMA (NUMA-Q) requires SMP, 64GB highmem support"
> >- depends on X86_NUMAQ && (!HIGHMEM64G || !SMP)
> >-
>
> Hmm. ISTR the reason we put that in there in the first place was that
> NUMA-Q got mysteriously hidden by other deps before, and it wasn't clear
> how to select it. Perhaps we just had some of the deps backwards.
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.
> 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
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [2.6 patch] some fixups for the X86_NUMAQ dependencies
2006-02-20 17:08 ` Adrian Bunk
@ 2006-02-20 17:39 ` Martin J. Bligh
2006-02-20 17:48 ` Adrian Bunk
2006-03-03 21:34 ` Adrian Bunk
0 siblings, 2 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Martin J. Bligh @ 2006-02-20 17:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Adrian Bunk; +Cc: linux-kernel
>>>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?
> 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.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [2.6 patch] some fixups for the X86_NUMAQ dependencies
2006-02-20 17:39 ` Martin J. Bligh
@ 2006-02-20 17:48 ` Adrian Bunk
2006-03-03 21:34 ` Adrian Bunk
1 sibling, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Adrian Bunk @ 2006-02-20 17:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Martin J. Bligh; +Cc: linux-kernel
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
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [2.6 patch] some fixups for the X86_NUMAQ dependencies
2006-02-20 17:39 ` Martin J. Bligh
2006-02-20 17:48 ` Adrian Bunk
@ 2006-03-03 21:34 ` Adrian Bunk
1 sibling, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Adrian Bunk @ 2006-03-03 21:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Martin J. Bligh; +Cc: linux-kernel
On Mon, Feb 20, 2006 at 09:39:38AM -0800, Martin J. Bligh wrote:
>...
> >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.
Have you tested my patch, and if yes, is it OK?
> 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
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* [2.6 patch] some fixups for the X86_NUMAQ dependencies
@ 2006-03-09 23:06 Adrian Bunk
0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Adrian Bunk @ 2006-03-09 23:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Morton; +Cc: linux-kernel, Martin J. Bligh
You must always ensure to fulfill the dependencies of what you are
select'ing.
Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de>
---
This patch was already sent on:
- 20 Feb 2006
arch/i386/Kconfig | 7 +++----
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
--- linux-2.6.16-rc3-mm1-full/arch/i386/Kconfig.old 2006-02-20 00:12:50.000000000 +0100
+++ linux-2.6.16-rc3-mm1-full/arch/i386/Kconfig 2006-02-20 00:17:57.000000000 +0100
@@ -84,6 +84,7 @@
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 @@
config NOHIGHMEM
bool "off"
+ depends on !X86_NUMAQ
---help---
Linux can use up to 64 Gigabytes of physical memory on x86 systems.
However, the address space of 32-bit x86 processors is only 4
@@ -455,6 +457,7 @@
config HIGHMEM4G
bool "4GB"
+ depends on !X86_NUMAQ
help
Select this if you have a 32-bit processor and between 1 and 4
gigabytes of physical RAM.
@@ -522,10 +525,6 @@
default n if X86_PC
default y if (X86_NUMAQ || X86_SUMMIT)
-# Need comments to help the hapless user trying to turn on NUMA support
-comment "NUMA (NUMA-Q) requires SMP, 64GB highmem support"
- depends on X86_NUMAQ && (!HIGHMEM64G || !SMP)
-
comment "NUMA (Summit) requires SMP, 64GB highmem support, ACPI"
depends on X86_SUMMIT && (!HIGHMEM64G || !ACPI)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2006-03-09 23:07 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2006-02-19 23:26 [2.6 patch] some fixups for the X86_NUMAQ dependencies Adrian Bunk
2006-02-20 16:33 ` Martin J. Bligh
2006-02-20 17:08 ` Adrian Bunk
2006-02-20 17:39 ` Martin J. Bligh
2006-02-20 17:48 ` Adrian Bunk
2006-03-03 21:34 ` Adrian Bunk
2006-03-09 23:06 Adrian Bunk
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).