On Thu, 2013-04-18 at 11:46 +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote: > On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 05:31:58PM +0800, Li Zhong wrote: > > I'm not sure whether it makes sense to add this dependency to avoid > > CONFI_NUMA && !CONFIG_SMP. > > > > I want to do this because I saw some build errors on next-tree when > > compiling with CONFIG_SMP disabled, and it seems they are caused by some > > codes under the CONFIG_NUMA #ifdefs. > > This seems to make sense to me. Can you please repost with a better > changelog and a description of the actual build error you were seeing.
I tried it today, but didn't find any build errors any more, guess those errors should have already been fixed. But it seems to me by disabling CONFIG_NUMA when CONFIG_SMP is disabled, could at least prevent some unnecessary code being compiled into the kernel. (After building a kernel with/without CONFIG_NUMA just now, it seems that the vmlinux is ~100K smaller without CONFIG_NUMA). I'm not sure whether this is still needed. Thanks, Zhong > > cheers > _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
