linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86: get more exact 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]

Date:	Mon, 04 Jan 2010 11:16:21 -0800
From:	ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To:	Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
Cc:	Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@...il.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	"linux-kernel\@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	NetDEV list <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86: get more exact nr_irqs

Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org> writes:

> On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 8:55 AM, Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@...ssion.com> wrote:
>> Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org> writes:
>>
>>> first check with NR_VECTORS - FIRST_EXTERNAL_VECTOR - 0x20
>>> aka minus exceptions and system vectors.
>>>
>>> NR_CPUS = 512, and nr_cpu_ids = 128
>>> will have NR_IRQS = 256 + 512 * 64 = 33024
>>>
>>> assume we have 20 intel ixgbe 6 port cards (with sriov and ixgbevf)
>>>       20 * 6 * 64 * 3 = 23040
>>>
>>> first will get:
>>>       128 * (256 - 64) = 24576
>>> then with nr_irqs_gsi will get
>>>       (120 + 8 * 128 + 120 * 256) = 31864
>>>
>>> so 24576 will be used for nr_irqs.
>>>
>>> 24576 * 8 = 196608 bytes will be used for irq_desc_ptrs[]
>>>
>>> before this patch:
>>>     have nr_irqs = 120 + 8 * 128 + 120 * 64 = 8824
>>>       and irq_desc_ptrs[] is 70592
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
>>
>> I am lost.    arch_probe_nr_irqs appears to be total nonsense.
>>
>> We have three concepts.
>> - The number of irq sources we can talk about.  ( nr_irqs)
>> - The number of irqs we can possibly service.   ((NR_VECTORS - 0x30) *nr_cpu_ids)
>> - The number of irqs we actually connected up to cards in the
>>  system that we need to do something with.
>>
>> Why do we need to allocate arrays at all?
>>
>
> irq_desc is allocated dynamically.
>
> but irq_desc_ptrs is pointer array, it need to be allocated after
> nr_irqs is probed.

If we care about memory use efficiency let's replace irq_desc_ptrs
with a rbtree or a radix_tree.  Something that moves the memory use
penalty onto those machines that have a lot of irqs.

Eric
--
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/