Zachary Amsden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Adrian Bunk wrote: >> On Tue, Apr 04, 2006 at 01:45:04AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: >> >>> ... >>> Changes since 2.6.16-mm2: >>> ... >>> +x86-clean-up-subarch-definitions.patch >>> ... >>> x86 updates. >>> ... >>> >> >> The following looks bogus: >> >> config KEXEC >> bool "kexec system call (EXPERIMENTAL)" >> - depends on EXPERIMENTAL >> + depends on EXPERIMENTAL && (!X86_VOYAGER && SMP) >> >> The dependencies do now say that KEXEC is only offered for machines that are >> _both_ non-Voyager and SMP. >> >> Is the problem you wanted to express that a non-SMP Voyager config didn't >> compile? >> > > Whoops, that should be > > depends on EXPERIMENTAL && !(X86_VOYAGER && SMP) > > Voyager SMP builds don't compile with kexec(), and it isn't clear how to > shootdown CPUs using NMIs without an APIC.
Well unless you need the crash dump functionality you don't need to shot down CPUs using NMIs. So I expect machine_crash_shutdown or at least a part of it should be a call into the subarchitecture code. Having it be a noop on voyager would be perfectly fine. Eric
_______________________________________________ fastboot mailing list [email protected] https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/fastboot
