Messages in this thread |  | | | Subject | RE: HT not working by default since 2.4.22 | | Date | Fri, 26 Sep 2003 00:54:44 -0400 | | From | "Brown, Len" <> |
| |
> Now that I've thought of it (aren't I humble), I rather like > CONFIG_HT. > It's simple and it's effects should be obvious to both developer and > user: > > CONFIG_HT, CONFIG_ACPI == ACPI > !CONFIG_HT, CONFIG_ACPI == ACPI > CONFIG_HT, !CONFIG_ACPI == HT-only ACPI > !CONFIG_HT, !CONFIG_ACPI == no ACPI > > Following the "autoconf model", what we really want to be testing with > CONFIG_xxx is _features_, where possible. "hyperthreading: yes/no" is > IMO more clear than "do I want ht-only ACPI or full ACPI", > while at the > same time being more fine-grained and future-proof.
I like positive logic too. I went so far as to try to implement this back when I deleted "noht".
The problem is that "!CONFIG_HT" is meaningless. It implies that you can have CONFIG_ACPI but still "config-out" HT, which you can't.
Ie. The 2nd row above says to give me ACPI w/o HT. If you delete that row and reverse the polarity you get:
!CONFIG_ACPI_HT_ONLY, CONFIG_ACPI == ACPI CONFIG_ACPI_HT_ONLY, !CONFIG_ACPI == HT-only ACPI !CONFIG_ACPI_HT_ONLY, !CONFIG_ACPI == no ACPI
Here we can use config to emphasize that it is not possible to select CONFIG_ACPI and CONFIG_ACPI_HT_ONLY at the same time.
Cheers, -Len
Ps. Note that in 2.6 CONFIG_X86_HT exists and covers the sibling code. It depends on CONFIG_SMP, and CONFIG_ACPI_HT_ONLY depends on it. (in the ACPI patch) - 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/
|  |