[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080327163314.GA24180@elte.hu>
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 17:33:15 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Alan Mayer <ajm@....com>
Cc: torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Robin Holt <holt@....com>, Jack Steiner <steiner@....com>,
Russ Anderson <rja@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86_64: resize NR_IRQS for large machines (re-submit)
* Alan Mayer <ajm@....com> wrote:
> > well, i dont it has to be (or it should be) an all or nothing patch,
> > given the complexity and risks involved.
> >
> > - we should first introduce a nr_irqs variable and a Kconfig switch
> > (say CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_DYNAMIC_NR_IRQS) for architectures to toggle. If
> > the switch is toggled, nr_irqs is a variable, otherwise it's a carbon
> > copy of NR_IRQS. Some array-definition, declaration and initialization
> > wrappers are provided as well.
> >
> > - then the core code, x86 and most drivers can be converted to nr_irqs.
> > The switch might initially even be user-selectable if
> > CONFIG_DEBUG_KERNEL, to ease regression testing.
> >
> > - other architectures will follow one by one, fixing their
> > arch-dependent drivers as well in the process
> >
> > - finally we get rid of the wrappers.
> >
> > Ingo
> >
>
> Okay, let's see if I understand this.
>
> First patch introduces a config switch and a variable, nr_irqs that is
> set to NR_IRQS. It also dynamically allocates the currently staticly
> allocated arrays that are dimensioned by NR_IRQS. It also initializes
> these dynamically allocated data structures. This is all done under
> the config switch, initially off by default.
>
> Second patch changes core code, x86 and most drivers to use nr_irqs.
> This patch will also introduce a calculation of nr_irqs, based on
> interrupt sources, that is a better estimate of the number of irqs
> in the running system than just picking a guaranteed not-to-exceed
> value that may be too big.
> Is there a way to identify which drivers need to be addressed?
>
> Then, test the crap out of it.
>
> Other architectures will follow, with the work being done by people
> familiar with those architectures.
>
> Clean up anything that's left over that's now been made unnecessary by
> the conversion by everyone. Including the config option?
>
> Do I have the gist of it?
i think you got it right, yes. But ... this is just a quick first-look
suggestion from me, YMMV. Maybe you find a way to do it much easier to
just convert everything at once. I tend to do things more gradually, in
my experience it's very hard and time-consuming to change the world all
at once - it's hard both to you the developer (you dont know whether it
works until you have a very substantial amount of code written - while
in a more gradual approach it can be converted one by one perhaps) - and
it's hard for users and fellow kernel hackers.
Ingo
--
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