* [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Fixup change NR_CPUS patchset by rebasing on 2.6.24-rc8-mm1
> from 2.6.24-rc6-mm1) and adding changes suggested by reviews.
>
> Based on 2.6.24-rc8-mm1 + latest (08/1/21) git-x86
>
> Note there are two versions of this patchset:
> - 2.6.24-rc8-mm1
> - 2.6.24-rc8-mm1 + latest (08/1/21) git-x86
thanks, applied.
> Signed-off-by: Mike Travis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> ---
> Fixup-V2:
> - pulled the SMP_MAX patch as it's not strictly needed and some
> more work on local cpumask_t variables needs to be done before
> NR_CPUS is allowed to increase.
i'd still love to see CONFIG_SMP_MAX, so that we can have continuous
randconfig testing of the large-SMP aspects of the x86 architecture,
even on smaller systems.
What's the maximum that should work right now? 256 or perhaps even 512
CPU ought to work fine i think?
and then once the on-stack usage problems are fixed, the NR_CPUS value
in CONFIG_SMP_MAX can be increased. So SMP_MAX would also act as "this
is how far we can go in the upstream kernel" documentation.
[ btw., the crash i remember was rather related to the NODES_SHIFT
increase to 9, not from the NR_CPUSs increase. (the config i sent
still has NR_CPUS==8, because Kconfig did not pick up the right
NR_CPUs value dicatated by SMP_MAX.) If you resend the SMP_MAX patch
against latest x86.git i can retest this. ]
Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
