[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090630223138.GH1241@elte.hu>
Date: Wed, 1 Jul 2009 00:31:38 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, tj@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, andi@...stfloor.org, hpa@...or.com,
tglx@...utronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCHSET] percpu: generalize first chunk allocators and
improve lpage NUMA support
* Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Jun 2009, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> > But what if not? What if the kernel can run on up to 4096 CPUs
> > and runs on a big box. Why should a virtual machine have the
> > illogical choice between either wasting a lot of RAM
> > preallocating stuff, or limiting its own extendability.
>
> The kernel may be able to run on 4096 but the machines config
> information that is available via ACPI knows how many processors
> the machine we are booting on is able to add.
I think we might be talking past each other.
The usecase i'm talking about is to boot a generic,
many-CPUs-capable kernel in a guest image.
How would you allow that guest to stay on 2 virtual CPUs but still
be able to hot-plug many other CPUs if the guest context rises above
its original CPU utilization?
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