* Andi Kleen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Friday 16 March 2007 11:55, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > * Chris Wright <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Given all the discussion, let's just require NO_HZ when
> > > CONFIG_PARAVIRT.  Anyone object?
> >
> > well ... why do we want this? I'd not mind making it default y if
> > CONFIG_PARAVIRT is enabled, but why force it?
> 
> I guess because they don't want to debug and maintain two different timer 
> code 
> paths. It would be fine for me. !NOHZ will hopefully go away at some point
> anyways and it clearly is important for virtualized environments.

Yes, esp. considering the NO_IDLE_HZ problem.

> Although I would prefer a select instead of a depends I think. Otherwise
> the relationship will be quite unobvious.

I thought about that, NO_HZ is still a user-visible feature rather than
smth like library support.  That's typically been the dividing line
for depends vs. select.

thanks,
-chris
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization

Reply via email to