[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Xen-devel] CONFIG_SMP or !CONFIG_SMP... that is the question. WAS: something about ia64 that nobody would read :-)


  • To: "xen-devel" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • From: "Magenheimer, Dan (HP Labs Fort Collins)" <dan.magenheimer@xxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 12:46:08 -0700
  • Delivery-date: Wed, 11 May 2005 19:46:06 +0000
  • List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
  • Thread-index: AcVWYhOb6iQzwhbMQRu/rv1j8qXTbg==
  • Thread-topic: CONFIG_SMP or !CONFIG_SMP... that is the question. WAS: something about ia64 that nobody would read :-)

> From: Ian Pratt [mailto:m+Ian.Pratt@xxxxxxxxxxxx] 

> It's daft that we even have a CONFIG_SMP option in Xen. It spends most
> of its time broken because no-one using x86 builds it, and you won't
> even be able to buy any non SMP hardware before long...
> 
> I'd vote for expunging CONFIG_SMP.

I've heard its not uncommon when debugging nasty problems on Linux
to turn off SMP as it simplifies the world considerably.

I'm not sure this same argument applies to Xen, but there's enough
kernel hackers on this list that I thought it would be interesting
to open this up for discussion.

Granted, turning off SMP on Xen/x86 doesn't even compile right
now, but that should be fixable.

So... opinions anyone?  Is keeping CONFIG_SMP (potentially) useful
or not?

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel


 


Rackspace

Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.