linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86: Allow 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: <20131104065147.GB13030@gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 4 Nov 2013 07:51:47 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc:	Josh Boyer <jwboyer@...hat.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, prarit@...hat.com,
	x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: Allow NR_CPUS=1024


* H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com> wrote:

> On 11/03/2013 07:57 AM, Josh Boyer wrote:
> > 
> > OK, that makes sense.  So in this scenario, we could probably either:
> > 
> > a) do away with MAXSMP entirely and just depend on
> > CONFIG_CPUMASK_OFFSTACK.
> > 
> > b) make MAXSMP something even higher than 4096.  Like 5120 or 6144, etc.
> > 
> > Which would you prefer?  Either is easy enough to code up, I just need
> > to know which I should shoot for.
> > 
> 
> Let's get rid of MAXSMP.

I'd rather not, because it has caught a number of regressions in the past, 
because randconfig can wander over it and trigger those large configs.

randconfig will not randomize numeric Kconfig ranges, so there's no other 
mechanism right now to trigger those large config kernels.

Thanks,

	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/