From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>
To: "Brown, Len" <len.brown@intel.com>
Cc: Stian Jordet <liste@jordet.nu>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [SOLVED] RE: 2.6.0-test3 latest bk hangs when enabling IO-APIC
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 21:57:23 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3F418403.709@pobox.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <BF1FE1855350A0479097B3A0D2A80EE009FC78@hdsmsx402.hd.intel.com>
Brown, Len wrote:
> implementation. Unless I screwed up the config dependencies, it should
> be impossible to enable the full CONFIG_ACPI without including
> CONFIG_ACPI_HT.
You got it right...
...unfortunately the current options are very non-obvious. Linux kernel
config has always presented a "subsystem switch", and under that, you
have a bunch of options and modules and such. It is not obvious to me
at all that _disabling_ CONFIG_ACPI_HT means that CONFIG_ACPI will
simply never appear. And users who want ACPI, but don't have
HyperThreading, would probably think similarly. I think the current
thread shows it generates at least a little bit of confusion, too.
To me, it makes sense for CONFIG_ACPI_HT to require CONFIG_ACPI -- from
a Kconfig standpoint -- but not the other way around. My first time
configuring with the new options, I wanted to turn off CONFIG_ACPI_HT
and turn on CONFIG_ACPI, but was frustrated when the config system
wouldn't allow it.
I actually think the old method was a bit less confusing --
CONFIG_ACPI=N would never prompt me for any other ACPI config option.
But if I wanted only the HT stuff, you had CONFIG_ACPI_HT_ONLY :)
So... concrete suggestions? Overall, IMO, move everything under
CONFIG_ACPI, or, make CONFIG_ACPI_BOOT a _peer_ option, whose selection
or lackthereof doesn't affect CONFIG_ACPI visibility at all.
Jeff
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-08-19 1:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-08-19 1:15 [SOLVED] RE: 2.6.0-test3 latest bk hangs when enabling IO-APIC Brown, Len
2003-08-19 1:57 ` Jeff Garzik [this message]
2003-08-19 7:22 ` Stian Jordet
2003-08-22 2:11 ` Mark W. Alexander
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-08-19 3:17 Brown, Len
2003-08-19 12:54 ` Stian Jordet
2003-08-19 15:26 ` Jeff Garzik
2003-08-19 15:44 ` Stian Jordet
2003-08-18 17:53 Brown, Len
2003-08-18 19:23 ` Stian Jordet
2003-08-18 20:06 ` Stian Jordet
2003-08-18 23:06 ` [SOLVED] " Stian Jordet
2003-08-18 23:12 ` Stian Jordet
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3F418403.709@pobox.com \
--to=jgarzik@pobox.com \
--cc=len.brown@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=liste@jordet.nu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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).