[lkml]   [1998]   [Oct]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Cyrix Detection -- NO SMP, please ?????
Khimenko Victor wrote:
> GM> First off, before you get all hot and bothered: SMP=1 SHOULD BE OFF BY
> GM> DEFAULT!. No one SHOULD be running a SMP kernel on a non SMP box! Yes, it
> GM> should not lockup.. But it's performance should be less. It should be no
> GM> problem for a dist to ship two sets of kernels and modules, and a util to
> GM> pick the right one.
> Performance issue is completely other story. Do you have util which is able to
> find existence of second CPU when UP kernel is loaded ? Otherwise we should
> use SMP kernel for installation CD (bootable of course :-) and this CD must
> work for MOST users.

This is a distribution issue, not a kernel issue.

> GM> It would be nice if a kernel could work optimally on SMP and UP. This is
> GM> not possible however, without such monstrosities as self modifying code.
> No, no, no. Not self modifying code! But we talk about different things.
> My words: "it should work "out of box" for [almost] all users [not optimally,
> of course]". Your answer: "it's [almost] not possible to create version which
> will work OPTIMALLY "out of box" for [almost] all users". This is other story.
> If you want performance you should recompile kernel with pentium or ppro
> optimisation for start :-)) Since in most distributions kernel is compiled with
> 386 optimisiation to ensure compatibility for example.

Again, this is a distribution issue.

> GM> No there should be seperate SMP and UP kernels. Do you think that x86 and
> GM> Alpha should run from the same kernel binary?
> This will be great but it's almost impossible to do :-((

Why would you even want to do this?
Unless someone is REALLY numb to his/er surroundings,
s/he will know whether or not the computer is an x86 or Alpha.
But, I think this is also a distribution issue.

> GM> The dists can simply use a setup command to pick SMP or UP..
> Dists should select right kernel automatically in most cases. Windows NT do
> this for last few years -- why Linux could not do this ? "Joe Average" viewpoint
> of course :-))

Look at what you said: Dists should select...
That's exactly right! The distributions should do it.
Not the kernel. This has nothing to do with the kernel.
In fact, everything but the APM stuff has nothing to
do with the kernel, so can we leave this behind and let
the distribution people worry about it?

Robert Dale

Kenny's Dad: We've got a Coleco Vision plugged into the black & white TV.
Kyle: Oh my God, this is like a third world country!

(South Park)

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:45    [W:0.149 / U:4.500 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site