[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4895561C.2030004@goop.org>
Date: Sat, 02 Aug 2008 23:54:20 -0700
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
CC: Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@...il.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Dhaval Giani <dhaval@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Mike Travis <travis@....com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86_64: Restore the proper NR_IRQS define so larger systems
work.
Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Xen pv 64 will work at least as well with a larger definition for
> NR_IRQS as it will work with a smaller definition, and since
> NR_VECTORS is 256 we always have more irqs with the 32bit definition
> we were mistakenly using.
>
> Xen has 1024 event channels so I expect 1024 would the nice number to
> provide there.
>
Yes, but really its overkill. It needs about 6 interrupts/cpu for
normal system overhead (timer, IPI, things like that), and then some
amount for virtual devices.
dom0 - the control domain - will need some number of events per other
guest domain, so it can start feeling the pressure depending on how many
domains and devices there are.
J
--
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