From: Martin Dalecki <dalecki@evision-ventures.com>
To: Ruth Ivimey-Cook <Ruth.Ivimey-Cook@ivimey.org>
Cc: "Randy.Dunlap" <rddunlap@osdl.org>, Robert Love <rml@tech9.net>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@zip.com.au
Subject: Re: [PATCH] CONFIG_NR_CPUS, redux
Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 20:29:35 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3D06418F.3050904@evision-ventures.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0206111917310.3521-100000@sharra.ivimey.org>
Użytkownik Ruth Ivimey-Cook napisał:
> On Tue, 11 Jun 2002, Randy.Dunlap wrote:
>
>
>>On 11 Jun 2002, Robert Love wrote:
>>
>>| Here are the defaults I picked:
>>|
>>| CONFIG_NR_CPUS=32: i386, mips, parisc, ppc, sparc
>>
>>I don't know what is "typical" for non-x86, but for x86, why not
>>use something more like a 'typical' NR_CPUS for SMP, like 8 (?)...
>>why still waste all of that memory?
>
>
> Perhaps it's just because I'm coming in late, but I cannot understand why
> NR_CPUS cannot be as low as 4 by default, for all archs, and then in the
> kernel boot messages, should more be found than is configured for a message is
> emitted to say "reconfigure your kernel", and continue with the number it was
> configured for. I personally only rarely see 2-way boxes, 4-way is pretty
> rare, and anything more must surely count as very specialized.
>
> Let the defaults be reasonable for 99% of users (IMO 99.9%), and let the rest
> have to think about config options...
Actually 2 would only make sense on Intel.
Well and then you have to account for the recent
HT additions so this becoumes 4.
On Sparc 4 is quite common.
But anything above is indeed very very rare.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-06-11 18:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-06-11 17:52 [PATCH] CONFIG_NR_CPUS, redux Robert Love
2002-06-11 18:09 ` Randy.Dunlap
2002-06-11 18:19 ` Robert Love
2002-06-11 18:21 ` Ruth Ivimey-Cook
2002-06-11 18:28 ` Robert Love
2002-06-12 1:36 ` jw schultz
2002-06-12 15:06 ` Martin J. Bligh
2002-06-12 15:22 ` William Lee Irwin III
2002-06-11 18:29 ` Martin Dalecki [this message]
2002-06-11 23:20 ` Dave Jones
2002-06-13 8:51 ` Helge Hafting
2002-06-19 11:53 ` Bill Davidsen
2002-06-11 20:10 ` Rob Radez
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-06-12 3:29 Matt_Domsch
2002-06-12 4:13 ` Austin Gonyou
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3D06418F.3050904@evision-ventures.com \
--to=dalecki@evision-ventures.com \
--cc=Ruth.Ivimey-Cook@ivimey.org \
--cc=akpm@zip.com.au \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rddunlap@osdl.org \
--cc=rml@tech9.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.