From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754065Ab0AHTti (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Jan 2010 14:49:38 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753977Ab0AHTti (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Jan 2010 14:49:38 -0500 Received: from mail-pz0-f171.google.com ([209.85.222.171]:45449 "EHLO mail-pz0-f171.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753928Ab0AHTth convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Jan 2010 14:49:37 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=cgsjWYNxuy7Oro5u3lFNcMsfnFhQVpyQE7ruNlYoet16csqJ6KNl5hevS79UgY7tcs g5lKwD6+kjpXdLobZ6VT0LgzHy9asx5hi1XZnWVyvbnGTOpo8oN4d41F4GDqhMFtcDmk vA4T2ViHRXUonIkS8xIguqWKRY5xTdZiBifZQ= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <1262951595-1729-1-git-send-email-yinghai@kernel.org> <1262951595-1729-5-git-send-email-yinghai@kernel.org> Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 11:49:36 -0800 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 467b9b5596618e09 Message-ID: <86802c441001081149k1be26027m62752604dca53aa@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] x86: update nr_irqs according cpu num From: Yinghai Lu To: "Eric W. Biederman" Cc: Ingo Molnar , Thomas Gleixner , "H. Peter Anvin" , Andrew Morton , Jesse Brandeburg , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 11:11 AM, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > Yinghai Lu writes: > >> that is max number on run time. > > Ouch!  Unless I misread this code this will leave nr_irqs at > NR_IRQS_LEGACY. aka 16. nr_irqs is set to NR_IRQS before. > > Let's do something stupid and simple. > nr_irqs = nr_cpus_ids * 256;  /* Semi-arbitrary number */ > > Ideally we would set "nr_irqs = 0x7fffffff;" but we have just enough > places using nr_irqs that I think those loops would get painful if we > were to do that. or you need have NR_IRQS = NR_CPUS * 256 at first, and then make nr_irqs = nr_cpu_ids * 224 ? YH