Re: SMP should be CONFIG_SMP and exclusive of APM?
Thu, 10 Apr 1997 10:27:14 -0400

On Wed, 9 Apr 1997, Alan Cox wrote:

> One problem is the APM bios isnt defined to be SMP safe in any docs I have
> I'd love to call APM if someone has APM docs confirming APM is SMP safe or
> has SMP extensions in docs I don't posess
> Any intel folks listening >

In any case, if I compile for SMP, my laptop stops seeing any APM events,
and the only code that doesn't get executed is what I indicated earlier in
arch/i386/kernel/process.c. It does recognize the single processor, and
everything else works, but although APM comes up (signon banner, etc), all
I get is -1% for my batteries and lots of other invalid stuff, and the
PCMCIA cards don't restart.

Even if SMP would simply recognize that there is only one processor and
leave everything else alone (even with SMP=1 uncommented) it would help
since then I could use a single kernel image. Right now it changes
something that prevents APM from working at all.
finger for PGP key