From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754580AbYLZOYW (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Dec 2008 09:24:22 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754529AbYLZOX5 (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Dec 2008 09:23:57 -0500 Received: from mx3.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.1.138]:42045 "EHLO mx3.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753854AbYLZOX4 (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Dec 2008 09:23:56 -0500 Date: Fri, 26 Dec 2008 15:22:36 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: Sam Ravnborg Cc: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de, akpm@linux-foundation.org, ralf@linux-mips.org, kernel@wantstofly.org, hskinnemoen@atmel.com, cooloney@kernel.org, tony.luck@intel.com, geert@linux-m68k.org, zippel@linux-m68k.org, jwboyer@linux.vnet.ibm.com, mporter@kernel.crashing.org, grant.likely@secretlab.ca, paulus@samba.org, benh@kernel.crashing.org, dhowells@redhat.com, yasutake.koichi@jp.panasonic.com, lethal@linux-sh.org, hpa@zytor.com Subject: Re: [PATCH -tip] Switch arm defconfig files from CONFIG_CLASSIC_RCU to CONFIG_TREE_RCU. Message-ID: <20081226142236.GA24249@elte.hu> References: <1229991147545-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <12299911471985-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20081223142542.GC29151@elte.hu> <20081225083611.GA14968@elte.hu> <20081225093301.GB27896@uranus.ravnborg.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20081225093301.GB27896@uranus.ravnborg.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamScore: -1.5 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-1.5 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.3 -1.5 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Sam Ravnborg wrote: > On Thu, Dec 25, 2008 at 09:36:11AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > below is the fix for another small buglet that hits architectures that do > > not include kernel/Kconfig.preempt. > > What is needed to let all architectures include Kconfig.preempt? > We should not advertise preemption if not supported, > but we could do this by a simple Kconfig symbol: > > config HAVE_PREEMPT > bool > > And let all architectures that supports preemption do: > > config "ARCH" > select HAVE_PREEMPT > > But maybe there is a simpler solution Since a preemptive kernel is not supported by all architectures, there has to be per arch ways to express this - i.e. i think your solution is the cleanest. Ingo