Re: [git pull] cpus4096 tree, part 3

[Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>]

* Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:

> On Sat, 3 Jan 2009, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > 
> > ok. The pending regressions are all fixed now, and i've just finished 
> > my standard tests on the latest tree and all the tests passed fine.
> 
> Ok, pulled and pushed out.

thanks!

> Has anybody looked at what the stack size is with MAXSMP set with an 
> allyesconfig? And what areas are still problematic, if any? Are we going 
> to have some code-paths that still essentially have 1kB+ of stack space 
> just because they haven't been converted and still have the cpu mask on 
> stack?

ok, indeed testing of that is in order now.

I'll check what the worst-case runtime stack footprint is for an 
allyesconfig 64-bit bootup - that should be the worst-case scenario on 
x86. We have a low number of leftover places, but the serious ones like 
the IPI paths, which triggered stack overflows in the past, got all fixed.

The test is underway with:

 CONFIG_64BIT=y
 CONFIG_NR_CPUS=4096
 CONFIG_MAXSMP=y

	Ingo