[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090625195408.GW6760@one.firstfloor.org>
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 21:54:08 +0200
From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
x86@...nel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu,
tglx@...utronix.de, cl@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHSET] percpu: generalize first chunk allocators and improve lpage NUMA support
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 07:18:07AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Andi Kleen wrote:
> >>>
> >> *Ahem* virtual machines *ahem*...
> >
> > And? Even there's not that big typically.
> >
> > The traditional problem was just for 128 NR_CPUs kernel were nothing
> > was sized based on machine capacity.
> >
> > Also on large systems the VMs shouldn't be sized for full capacity.
> >
>
> We have already have cases where the "possible" CPUs have eaten up the
> entire vmalloc area on 32 bits. In real use. It's a real problem.
That's hard to believe or a serious bug/misconfiguration somewhere.
Each per CPU data should be <100k (let's say 200k with some slack for modules),
so to fill vmalloc you would need hundreds of CPUs, which a 32bit
kernel doesn't really support anyways because it doesn't support
enough memory for that many CPUs.
Perhaps you had firmware/hypervisor who passed a gigantic impossible
value here? If yes thy
-Andi
--
ak@...ux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.
--
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