Re: x86: unify genapic code, unify subarchitectures, remove oldsubarchitecture code

[Ingo Molnar]

* Tim Pepper <lnxninja@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> The machines (yes plural!) on which we had regular testing happening 
> have been offline for a few months due to some broader dependencies (eg: 
> console server in the old product used an old version of windows that 
> doesn't meet the corporate security standards) and we've just not 
> managed to get past that.  That in turn is in the way of debugging boot 
> issues with newer kernels.  At this point the most passionate 
> Sequent/IBMers caring about the NUMAQ support are resigned to it being a 
> lost cause.
> 
> The main benefit to carrying NUMAQ support along this long was these 
> machines had a knack for triggering real bugs.  But since there's no 
> active bug testing happening on them now and it doesn't look like there 
> will be...

At this point there's no technical need to kill it - it's a zero-overhead 
thing tucked away into a single .c module in arch/x86/kernel/numaq_32.c. I 
even consolidated most of its headers in that file, to reduce its cross 
section.

That was the main point of the restructuring i did - subarchitectures were 
causing ongoing maintenance overhead before. That overhead is practically 
zero now.

So two days ago it might have made some sense to rip out this code - now 
there's no pressing need really. We can remove it in a few years once the 
last beep has been received from those platforms. The numaq code is now 
quite similar to an old driver in drivers/* - there's no real downside 
from having it around.

	Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/