On Fri, 26 Feb 2021 17:03:53 PST (-0800), [email protected] wrote:
On 2021/2/27 4:25, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
From: Palmer Dabbelt <[email protected]>
In theory these are orthogonal, but in practice all NUMA systems are
SMP. NUMA && !SMP doesn't build, everyone else is coupling them, and I
don't really see any value in supporting that configuration.
Fixes: 4f0e8eef772e ("riscv: Add numa support for riscv64 platform")
Suggested-by: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
Suggested-by: Atish Patra <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Palmer Dabbelt <[email protected]>
Reported-and-Tested-by: Kefeng Wang <[email protected]>
Ah, thanks, I forged I'd said no to this earlier ;)
---
This is on fixes.
---
arch/riscv/Kconfig | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/arch/riscv/Kconfig b/arch/riscv/Kconfig
index a998babc1237..85d626b8ce5e 100644
--- a/arch/riscv/Kconfig
+++ b/arch/riscv/Kconfig
@@ -314,6 +314,7 @@ endchoice
# Common NUMA Features
config NUMA
bool "NUMA Memory Allocation and Scheduler Support"
+ depends on SMP
select GENERIC_ARCH_NUMA
select OF_NUMA
select ARCH_SUPPORTS_NUMA_BALANCING
