Re: [RFC] killing the NR_IRQS arrays.

[Jeremy Fitzhardinge]

Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Well you shouldn't need to wait just run with a kernel with NR_IRQS >= 1024.
> 1024 is stretch but it isn't to bad.  There are already x86 boxes that have
> more pins on their ioapics then that. So x86_64 and with this latest
> round of patches from Len Brown and I i386 should be able to support that.
>   

Early Xen patches did just that, but there was general criticism about
the memory use.  And in the paravirt_ops world, a large compile-time
static allocation is not really acceptable if its only needed by Xen. 
But, hey, if you're OK with it I'll submit the patch ;)

> On the other side 1024 looks extremely limiting for exposing pci devices.  
> If someone gets serious about pushing what is legal with MSI-X you may be
> in trouble.  As a single device is allowed to have 4096 interrupts.   Not
> that I can think of a user for so many but...
>   

No, I think we'll burn that bridge when we come to it.

    J
-
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/