Re: [PATCH] powerpc: update ibm,client-architecture

2009-12-21 Thread Tony Breeds
On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 04:14:54PM -0600, Joel Schopp wrote: > It's a bad interface. No matter what you choose there will be a > downside. 1) If you choose NR_CPUS, the best case of how many you > could boot without SMT, then when you boot with SMT2 or SMT4 you can > get assigned more cpus than

Re: [PATCH] powerpc: update ibm,client-architecture

2009-12-21 Thread Michael Neuling
>>> OK. >>> > + W(NR_CPUS/4), /* max cores supported */ > >> >> FYI reading the PAPR, this comment should technically be "max 'cpu' >> nodes presented". >> >I applied a disambiguation filter to the comment since cpus can mean a >lot of things these days (

Re: [PATCH] powerpc: update ibm,client-architecture

2009-12-21 Thread Tony Breeds
On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 12:22:09PM -0600, Joel Schopp wrote: > 4 is the new 2. Since the actual threads per core is unknown at > this point in boot you have to be conservative and go with the > maximum number of any processor. See page 4 of these charts: > http://www.power.org/events/powercon09/

Re: [PATCH] powerpc: update ibm,client-architecture

2009-12-21 Thread Joel Schopp
OK. + W(NR_CPUS/4), /* max cores supported */ FYI reading the PAPR, this comment should technically be "max 'cpu' nodes presented". I applied a disambiguation filter to the comment since cpus can mean a lot of things these days ( ie hardware threads,

Re: [PATCH] powerpc: update ibm,client-architecture

2009-12-21 Thread Michael Neuling
> >> Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc: update ibm,client-architecture > >> > > > > Please give this a more appropriate name. > > > Any suggestions? Something that's more descriptive of what the patch does. Say "Add max CPU nodes field to ib

Re: [PATCH] powerpc: update ibm,client-architecture

2009-12-21 Thread Joel Schopp
Tony Breeds wrote: On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 03:07:32PM -0600, Joel Schopp wrote: In order to boot with more than 64 cores on machines that support the ibm,client-architecture RTAS call a new field has been added to the structure. This patch updates that field and adds a few others in the proc

Re: [PATCH] powerpc: update ibm,client-architecture

2009-12-21 Thread Joel Schopp
Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc: update ibm,client-architecture Please give this a more appropriate name. Any suggestions? In order to boot with more than 64 cores on machines that support the ibm,client-architecture RTAS call a new field has been added to the structure. This

Re: [PATCH] powerpc: update ibm,client-architecture

2009-12-20 Thread Tony Breeds
On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 03:07:32PM -0600, Joel Schopp wrote: > In order to boot with more than 64 cores on machines that support the > ibm,client-architecture RTAS call a new field has been added to the > structure. This patch updates that field and adds a few others in the > process. It would be

Re: [PATCH] powerpc: update ibm,client-architecture

2009-12-20 Thread Michael Neuling
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc: update ibm,client-architecture Please give this a more appropriate name. > In order to boot with more than 64 cores on machines that support the > ibm,client-architecture RTAS call a new field has been added to the > structure. This patch updates th

[PATCH] powerpc: update ibm,client-architecture

2009-12-18 Thread Joel Schopp
In order to boot with more than 64 cores on machines that support the ibm,client-architecture RTAS call a new field has been added to the structure. This patch updates that field and adds a few others in the process. It would be good if this could go in as a bugfix. Signed-off-by: Joel Scho