Re: [patch] x86: reduce srat verbosity in the kernel log

[Mike Travis]

Andi Kleen wrote:
> > MAX_LOCAL_APIC was definitely an arbitrary choice here and has very little 
> > relevance.  scnlistprintf will protect against overflow, but we still need 
> > to decide upon a constant that will emit the most information possible 
> > while not overly polluting the printk and saving on bss, as you mentioned.  
> > I suspect we could agree on a value as little as 128 and it would work for 
> > the overwhelming majority (all?) of users.
>
> For now at least seems reasonable to limit to 128 or so yes (and go
> back to the stack). if we ever have sparse apic ids for nodes 
> then that might change; but in this case could still just do
> a acpidump or teach the printer to be more clever and support
> strides.
>
> It would be just good to have some indication in the output
> if there was a overflow.
>
> -Andi

I don't understand the importance of this when the memory is given back
after the system starts up anyway...?

Thanks,
Mike
--
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/