[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <m1k65kcuby.fsf@ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com>
Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2006 11:46:25 -0600
From: ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: "Randy.Dunlap" <rdunlap@...otime.net>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>, Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>,
"Protasevich, Natalie" <Natalie.Protasevich@...SYS.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86_64: Make NR_IRQS configurable in Kconfig
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com> writes:
> Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> a) Because I would like to flush out bugs.
>> b) Because I want a default that works for everyone.
>> c) Because with MSI we have a potential for large irq counts on most systems.
>> d) Because anyone who disagrees with me can send a patch and fix
>> the default.
>> e) Because with the default number of cpus we can very close to needing
>> this many irqs in the worst case.
>> f) This is much better than previous to my patch and setting NR_CPUS=255
>> and getting 8K IRQS.
>> g) Because I probably should have been more inventive than copying the
>> NR_IRQS text, but when I did the wording sounded ok to me.
>>
>
> Why not simply reserve 224*NR_CPUS IRQs? If you have 256 CPUs allocating 64K
> IRQs should hardly matter :)
Well there is this little matter of 224*NR_CPUS*NR_CPUS counters at that point
that I think would be prohibitive for most sane people. Taking 224K of per cpu
memory in 256 different per cpu areas.
Still what is 56MB when you have a terrabyte of RAM. :)
Eric
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists