Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 6 Nov 2008 12:15:06 +0200 | From | "Pekka Enberg" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] change CONFIG_NUMA description |
| |
Hi Ingo,
On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 10:53 AM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote: > From fd51b2d7d5df932767b89e00d0871a38a2c53e74 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> > Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2008 02:27:19 +0900 > Subject: [PATCH] x86: update CONFIG_NUMA description > > Impact: clarify/update CONFIG_NUMA text > > CONFIG_NUMA description talk about a bit old thing. > So, following changes are better. > > o CONFIG_NUMA is no longer EXPERIMENTAL > > o Opteron is not the only processor of NUMA topology on x86_64 no longer, > but also Intel Core7i has it. > > Signed-off-by: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> > Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> > --- > arch/x86/Kconfig | 16 ++++++++++------ > 1 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/x86/Kconfig b/arch/x86/Kconfig > index 350bee1..38ae04b 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/Kconfig > +++ b/arch/x86/Kconfig > @@ -951,22 +951,26 @@ config ARCH_PHYS_ADDR_T_64BIT > > # Common NUMA Features > config NUMA > - bool "Numa Memory Allocation and Scheduler Support (EXPERIMENTAL)" > + bool "Numa Memory Allocation and Scheduler Support" > depends on SMP > depends on X86_64 || (X86_32 && HIGHMEM64G && (X86_NUMAQ || X86_BIGSMP || X86_SUMMIT && ACPI) && EXPERIMENTAL)
Why does this depend on CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL still?
> default n if X86_PC > default y if (X86_NUMAQ || X86_SUMMIT || X86_BIGSMP) > help > Enable NUMA (Non Uniform Memory Access) support. > + > The kernel will try to allocate memory used by a CPU on the > local memory controller of the CPU and add some more > NUMA awareness to the kernel. >
| |