On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 8:50 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 7:30 PM, Paul E. McKenney
> <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> Furthermore, it seems only hexagon, metag, mips, and x86 set NR_CPUS to 1
>>> if !SMP. On other architectures, NR_CPUS is not defined and presumed to be 0.
>>
>> Would it make sense to require that NR_CPUS=1 for !SMP?
>
> Yes, this looks reasonable to me.
Perhaps we can invert the logic and define only NR_CPUS in arch-specific
code, and derive SMP from NR_CPUS != 1 in generic code?
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kbuild" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
