for 2.4 it's a matter of compatability; also Andrew said it made the
code cleaner actually.
> > Re: "acpismp=force"
> > I wouldn't miss it. Sounds unanimous.
>
> It did have some point before, recent changes have rendered it pointless,
> and even if those changes get revised, there'll be a better way than the
> confusing "acpismp=force".
it became mostly useless when the automatic detection based on CPU flag went it
> > Re: "noht"
> > To disable HT on a uni-processor, wouldn't it be preferable to simply run
> > the UP kernel rather than the SMP kernel with HT disabled?
>
> Yes, though wouldn't BIOS be able to disable it on those too?
not all bioses have such a setting unfortionatly so it remains a
useful option.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/