Re: [rfc] __SMP__ vs. CONFIG_SMP
David Schleef (ds@stm.lbl.gov)
Mon, 27 Dec 1999 07:44:44 -0800
On Mon, Dec 27, 1999 at 12:45:30PM +1100, Rusty Russell wrote:
> In message <199912260312.VAA23979@duracef.shout.net> you write:
> > But if you want to write up a partial patch (like arch/i386 and
> > include/i386) and submit it to Linus and get his opinion, go for it.
>
> Note that Linus doesn't eat such patches easily. I submitted a
> s/__SMP__/CONFIG_SMP/ patch some months ago and it went nowhere.
>
> CONFIG_SMP everywhere: easier for external module compilation...
>
> Rusty.
A s/__SMP__/CONFIG_SMP/ patch ignores all the subtle places where
__SMP__ is defined and CONFIG_SMP would not be. I agree, however,
with the need for CONFIG_SMP everywhere. It also would be nice
to fix the -DMODVERSIONS and -include "modversions.h"
Are there any good gcc tricks that would make the __SMP__->CONFIG_SMP
migration patch easier?
dave...
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/