Re: [PATCH 34/35] x86: use num_processors for possible cpus

[H. Peter Anvin]

On 02/17/2010 06:38 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote:
>>
>> I'm confused by this one.  This would seem to mean that unless you're
>> specifying possible_cpus= then you are not treating anything as
>> hotpluggable.
>>
>> This is clearly wrong, and it would appear to go the wrong direction in
>> terms of what is safe.
>>
>> What am I missing here?
> 
> per_cpu setup will allocate some mem for every cpu according to possible cpus.
> 

Yes, and I have repeatedly requested that we allocate the memory on the
first up of a disabled CPU rather than eagerly, but in *most*
configurations the amount is relatively small.

> no spec says that we should disable cpus entries in MADT as hotplug cpus.

Reality seems to, though.  Consider the bug report that led to patch
681ee44d40d7c93b42118320e4620d07d8704fd6 for example.

> also how many system that support hotplug cpus there?

In terms of physical machines, not all that many; however, it is getting
common to use CPU hotplug for virtual environments so they can be
dynamically scaled.

	-hpa

--
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/