lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Sep]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: HT not working by default since 2.4.22
On Thu, Sep 25, 2003 at 11:37:43PM -0400, Len Brown wrote:
> > How about the more simple CONFIG_HYPERTHREAD or CONFIG_HT?
> >
> > If enabled and CONFIG_SMP is set, then we will attempt to discover HT
> > via ACPI tables, regardless of CONFIG_ACPI value.
>
> Yes, except I think we should keep the name CONFIG_ACPI_HT_ONLY since it
> says exactly what it does.
>
> Hopefully I can make it looke clear in the menus --
> I think on the config menus for CONFIG_ACPI_HT_ONLY and CONFIG_ACPI
> should be mutually exclusive.

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.


> > Or... (I know multiple people will shoot me for saying this) we could
> > resurrect acpitable.[ch], and build that when CONFIG_ACPI is disabled.
>
> The question about configs is independent of the acpitable.[ch] vs
> table.c implementation. No, we should not return to maintaining two
> copies of the acpi table code.

Point; agreed.

Jeff


-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:48    [W:0.059 / U:0.416 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site