linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86: increase NR_IRQS and nr

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20091228094707.GH24690@elte.hu>
Date:	Mon, 28 Dec 2009 10:47:07 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
Cc:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: increase NR_IRQS and nr_irqs

* Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org> wrote:

> have a system with lots of igb and ixgbe, when iov/vf are enabled for
> them, we hit the limit of 3064.
> 
> so try to increase NR_IRQS and nr_irqs to about 8000 and 6000.
> for that system.

could you please provide before/after .data size analysis, expected dynamic 
allocation overhead difference (if any), etc. - so that we can see whether 
there's any (and if yes, how much) cost due to the bumping of the limit.

Also, instead of just upping the limit to a new random limit that works on 
that testbox, could we put some more thought into how much we want to increase 
it, and stay at least 2-3 years ahead of the expected hardware curve?

	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/