Re: [PATCH] Only show RESOURCES_64BIT on relevant architectures

2007-10-30 Thread Russell King
On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 06:13:16AM -0600, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 11:42:21AM +, Ralf Baechle wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 02:37:19AM -0600, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > > On Mon, Oct 29, 2007 at 10:03:16PM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote: > > > > same HW platform that you wan

Re: [PATCH] Only show RESOURCES_64BIT on relevant architectures

2007-10-30 Thread Kumar Gala
On Oct 30, 2007, at 3:37 AM, Matthew Wilcox wrote: On Mon, Oct 29, 2007 at 10:03:16PM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote: The same is true on PPC32. Its a per platform thing. However, I'm not sure if we could hide it from the user. There are cases on the same HW platform that you want to run with jus

Re: [PATCH] Only show RESOURCES_64BIT on relevant architectures

2007-10-30 Thread Ralf Baechle
On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 06:13:16AM -0600, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 02:37:19AM -0600, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > > On Mon, Oct 29, 2007 at 10:03:16PM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote: > > > > same HW platform that you want to run with just 32-bit phys (for > > > > performance). > >

Re: [PATCH] Only show RESOURCES_64BIT on relevant architectures

2007-10-30 Thread Matthew Wilcox
On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 11:42:21AM +, Ralf Baechle wrote: > On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 02:37:19AM -0600, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 29, 2007 at 10:03:16PM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote: > > > same HW platform that you want to run with just 32-bit phys (for > > > performance). > > > > Have

Re: [PATCH] Only show RESOURCES_64BIT on relevant architectures

2007-10-30 Thread Ralf Baechle
On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 02:37:19AM -0600, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Mon, Oct 29, 2007 at 10:03:16PM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote: > > The same is true on PPC32. Its a per platform thing. However, I'm > > not sure if we could hide it from the user. There are cases on the > > same HW platform th

Re: [PATCH] Only show RESOURCES_64BIT on relevant architectures

2007-10-30 Thread Matthew Wilcox
On Mon, Oct 29, 2007 at 10:03:16PM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote: > The same is true on PPC32. Its a per platform thing. However, I'm > not sure if we could hide it from the user. There are cases on the > same HW platform that you want to run with just 32-bit phys (for > performance). Have you

Re: [PATCH] Only show RESOURCES_64BIT on relevant architectures

2007-10-29 Thread Kumar Gala
On Oct 29, 2007, at 9:48 PM, Ralf Baechle wrote: On Sun, Oct 28, 2007 at 04:15:49PM -0400, Kyle McMartin wrote: +++ b/mm/Kconfig @@ -172,6 +172,7 @@ config MIGRATION config RESOURCES_64BIT bool "64 bit Memory and IO resources (EXPERIMENTAL)" if (!64BIT && EXPERIMENTAL) + depends

Re: [PATCH] Only show RESOURCES_64BIT on relevant architectures

2007-10-29 Thread Ralf Baechle
On Sun, Oct 28, 2007 at 04:15:49PM -0400, Kyle McMartin wrote: > +++ b/mm/Kconfig > @@ -172,6 +172,7 @@ config MIGRATION > > config RESOURCES_64BIT > bool "64 bit Memory and IO resources (EXPERIMENTAL)" if (!64BIT && > EXPERIMENTAL) > + depends on (MIPS || PPC32 || X86_PAE) || 64BIT

Re: [PATCH] Only show RESOURCES_64BIT on relevant architectures

2007-10-29 Thread Russell King
On Mon, Oct 29, 2007 at 11:21:52AM -0400, Kyle McMartin wrote: > On Mon, Oct 29, 2007 at 08:10:10AM +, Russell King wrote: > > May I suggest trying: > > > > $ grep RESOURCES_64BIT=y arch/*/configs/* arch/*/defconfig > > > > to locate those architectures which use this? > > > > FYI, that grep

Re: [PATCH] Only show RESOURCES_64BIT on relevant architectures

2007-10-29 Thread Kyle McMartin
On Mon, Oct 29, 2007 at 08:10:10AM +, Russell King wrote: > On Sun, Oct 28, 2007 at 04:15:49PM -0400, Kyle McMartin wrote: > > To quote lolcats: CONFIG_RESOURCES_64BIT DO NOT WANT! > > > > I *think* I have the logic of this right... Anyway, I was annoyed by > > having to do the bloody ugly cas

Re: [PATCH] Only show RESOURCES_64BIT on relevant architectures

2007-10-29 Thread Kyle McMartin
On Sun, Oct 28, 2007 at 06:09:49PM -0700, David Miller wrote: > From: Kyle McMartin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2007 16:15:49 -0400 > > > To quote lolcats: CONFIG_RESOURCES_64BIT DO NOT WANT! > > > > I *think* I have the logic of this right... Anyway, I was annoyed by > > having to do

Re: [PATCH] Only show RESOURCES_64BIT on relevant architectures

2007-10-29 Thread Russell King
On Sun, Oct 28, 2007 at 04:15:49PM -0400, Kyle McMartin wrote: > To quote lolcats: CONFIG_RESOURCES_64BIT DO NOT WANT! > > I *think* I have the logic of this right... Anyway, I was annoyed by > having to do the bloody ugly casts to unsigned long long in > arch-specific code. As near as I can tell,

Re: [PATCH] Only show RESOURCES_64BIT on relevant architectures

2007-10-28 Thread David Miller
From: Kyle McMartin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2007 16:15:49 -0400 > To quote lolcats: CONFIG_RESOURCES_64BIT DO NOT WANT! > > I *think* I have the logic of this right... Anyway, I was annoyed by > having to do the bloody ugly casts to unsigned long long in > arch-specific code. As nea

[PATCH] Only show RESOURCES_64BIT on relevant architectures

2007-10-28 Thread Kyle McMartin
To quote lolcats: CONFIG_RESOURCES_64BIT DO NOT WANT! I *think* I have the logic of this right... Anyway, I was annoyed by having to do the bloody ugly casts to unsigned long long in arch-specific code. As near as I can tell, we only want this selectable in the case of PAE on x86, and some random