Re: [PATCH] x86_64: resize NR_IRQS for large machines (re-submit)

[Alan Mayer]

On Wed, 26 Mar 2008, Ingo Molnar wrote:

> 
> * Alan Mayer <ajm@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > On machines with very large numbers of cpus, tables that are 
> > dimensioned by NR_IRQS get very large, especially the irq_desc table.  
> > They are also very sparsely used.  When the cpu count is > 
> > MAX_IO_APICS, use MAX_IO_APICS to set NR_IRQS, otherwise use NR_CPUS.
> 
> thanks Alan, applied this in place of the other patch.
> 
> this bit is still ugly:
> 
> > -#define NR_IRQS (NR_VECTORS + (32 *NR_CPUS))
> > +#if NR_CPUS < MAX_IO_APICS
> > +#define NR_IRQS (NR_VECTORS + (32 * NR_CPUS))
> > +#else
> > +#define NR_IRQS (NR_VECTORS + (32 * MAX_IO_APICS))
> > +#endif
> >  #define NR_IRQ_VECTORS NR_IRQS
> 
> but it doesnt really depart from the current status quo of huge 
> [NR_IRQS] arrays either. Patches that make NR_IRQS a variable are 
> welcome :)
> 
> 	Ingo
> 

Good luck with that.  If i come up with something that's elegant enough
to make it worth the risk, I'll let you know.  Changing NR_IRQS to a variable
touches every arch and a lot of drivers.  Someone is bound to choke
on it, so it has to be something worth fighting for.

		--ajm

Lately it occurs to me,
What a long, strange trip it's been.
--
Alan J. Mayer
SGI
ajm@xxxxxxx
WORK: 651-683-3131
HOME: 651-407-0134
--

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/