Paul, All, On 2013-09-07 11:57 -0700, Paul E. McKenney spake thusly: > On Sat, Sep 07, 2013 at 11:13:48AM +0200, Yann E. MORIN wrote: [--SNIP--] > > I'll see if I can come up with a meaningfull construct that fixes your > > use-case. Don't hold your breath, though! ;-) > > If not, we need to add NR_CPUS to the architectures lacking them... Unfortunately, I was not able to come up with anything suitable. I think your proposal to always define NR_CPUS=1 for architectures without SMP support is a good solution. After all, if !SMP because the architecture does not support it, I believe it makes sense that NR_CPUS be defined to 1. Unless NR_CPUS carries with it a hidden meaning about SMP being possible, that is, which would probably be wrong anyway, since we have SMP for this. Regards, Yann E. MORIN. -- .-----------------.--------------------.------------------.--------------------. | Yann E. MORIN | Real-Time Embedded | /"\ ASCII RIBBON | Erics' conspiracy: | | +33 662 376 056 | Software Designer | \ / CAMPAIGN | ___ | | +33 223 225 172 `------------.-------: X AGAINST | \e/ There is no | | http://ymorin.is-a-geek.org/ | _/*\_ | / \ HTML MAIL | v conspiracy. | '------------------------------^-------^------------------^--------------------' -- 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
