From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Julien Grall Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/8] xenalyze: increase NR_CPUS to 256 Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2015 07:03:56 -0400 Message-ID: <55796B1C.9020309@citrix.com> References: <1433849019-27452-1-git-send-email-olaf@aepfle.de> <1433849019-27452-3-git-send-email-olaf@aepfle.de> <55789E1C.9030504@citrix.com> <20150611061226.GA22268@aepfle.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20150611061226.GA22268@aepfle.de> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Olaf Hering Cc: Wei Liu , Ian Campbell , Stefano Stabellini , George Dunlap , Ian Jackson , xen-devel@lists.xen.org List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 11/06/2015 02:12, Olaf Hering wrote: > On Wed, Jun 10, Julien Grall wrote: > >> There is also a variable MAX_CPUS defined to 256. which is used every. > > You are right, while forwarding an old patch (from memory) I changed the > wrong place. MAX_CPUS is already at 256 so no change is strictly > neccessary. > > I suggest to drop that patch from this series while applying. > Thanks for the review. I would suggest some refactoring to remove NR_CPUS and associated code in order to avoid mis-usage later. Also, cpu_mask_t is a uint32_t, is it intentional? Regards, -- Julien Grall