I am not addressing anything other than the sn2_defconfig, but it has gotten so stale that nobody I know inside SGI uses it any longer. We either maintain our own config file or start with the generic_defconfig and adjust the things we need. If any of our engineers wanted to eliminate the mach_vec stuff, we would likely start from the generic_defconfig and change _GENERIC to _SN2. On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 10:20:03AM -0700, Luck, Tony wrote: > > Not really a patch as much as a remove this file request. Now that > > generic_defconfig supports all the configurations SGI currently supports > > and has NR_CPUS and NR_NODES at our largest configurations, we have no > > reason to maintain the extra defconfig file. > > I'm wondering whether we really want to do this ... and in turn wondering > about the value of the "generic" vs. system specific config files and the > whole machvec mechanism. I don't think I understand your argument. Are you essentially saying we should consider eliminating the mach_vec stuff entirely? If so, will we essentially be saying that the distros need to build a seperate kernel for each of tiger, zx1, sn2, and uv? Thanks, Robin -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
|