lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Dec]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [GIT pull] x86/pti: Preparatory changes
On Sat, Dec 23, 2017 at 11:23 AM, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote:
>
> Todays Advent calendar window contains twentyfour easy to digest
> patches.

Thanks, this was nice and clear and I saw nothing odd at all.

My only reaction ended up being that I don't much like how complex the
NR_CPUS config entry has become, and how confusing that is.

For example, we now have

range 2 64 if SMP && X86_32 && X86_BIGSMP

but then we have

default "8192" if MAXSMP

which seems to make no sense, and unlike some of the other defaults
it's not clear that those things aren't compatible. It turns out that
MAXSMP is limited to X86_64, but that's not at all obvious within that
config entry.

So I think that could be simplified by introducing separate
MAX_CONFIG_CPUS etc entries (that aren't user choice, but just codify
the limits), so that there would be some more abstraction there.

So the NR_CPUS thing would become something like

config NR_CPUS
int "Maximum number of CPUs" if SMP && !MAXSMP
range MIN_CONFIG_CPUS MAX_CONFIG_CPUS
default DEF_CONFIG_CPUS

and then have separate (simpler) config expressions for those
MIN/MAX/DEF values, rather than making it one big complex config
entry.

But that was not new complexity (just added complexity to an already
confusing case), and it's purely bike-shedding.

So I've pulled this stuff, and will push out once it passes my trivial
build test (which I obviously expect it to do, since my final build
test is much more limited than what you guys do).

Linus

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-12-23 21:13    [W:0.038 / U:0.308 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site