From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Kumar Gala <galak@kernel.crashing.org>
Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] powerpc: respect how command line nr_cpus is set
Date: Thu, 05 May 2011 12:25:02 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1304562302.2513.418.camel@pasglop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1304540257-19831-1-git-send-email-galak@kernel.crashing.org>
On Wed, 2011-05-04 at 15:17 -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
> We should utilize nr_cpus as the max # of CPUs that we can have present
> instead of NR_CPUS. This way we actually respect how nr_cpus is set on
> the command line rather than ignoring it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Kumar Gala <galak@kernel.crashing.org>
> ---
> I think this is what we should be doing, but would like someone else to take
> a look.
The main question I have is should max_cpus absolutely limit the number
of possible CPUs or should it limit the number that get automatically
onlined at boot, potentially letting us bring the rest online later on ?
Cheers,
Ben.
> - k
>
> arch/powerpc/kernel/setup-common.c | 10 +++++-----
> 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/setup-common.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/setup-common.c
> index 21f30cb..fedf813 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/setup-common.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/setup-common.c
> @@ -424,7 +424,7 @@ void __init smp_setup_cpu_maps(void)
>
> DBG("smp_setup_cpu_maps()\n");
>
> - while ((dn = of_find_node_by_type(dn, "cpu")) && cpu < NR_CPUS) {
> + while ((dn = of_find_node_by_type(dn, "cpu")) && cpu < nr_cpu_ids) {
> const int *intserv;
> int j, len;
>
> @@ -443,7 +443,7 @@ void __init smp_setup_cpu_maps(void)
> intserv = &cpu; /* assume logical == phys */
> }
>
> - for (j = 0; j < nthreads && cpu < NR_CPUS; j++) {
> + for (j = 0; j < nthreads && cpu < nr_cpu_ids; j++) {
> DBG(" thread %d -> cpu %d (hard id %d)\n",
> j, cpu, intserv[j]);
> set_cpu_present(cpu, true);
> @@ -483,12 +483,12 @@ void __init smp_setup_cpu_maps(void)
> if (cpu_has_feature(CPU_FTR_SMT))
> maxcpus *= nthreads;
>
> - if (maxcpus > NR_CPUS) {
> + if (maxcpus > nr_cpu_ids) {
> printk(KERN_WARNING
> "Partition configured for %d cpus, "
> "operating system maximum is %d.\n",
> - maxcpus, NR_CPUS);
> - maxcpus = NR_CPUS;
> + maxcpus, nr_cpu_ids);
> + maxcpus = nr_cpu_ids;
> } else
> printk(KERN_INFO "Partition configured for %d cpus.\n",
> maxcpus);
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-05-05 2:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-05-04 20:17 [RFC][PATCH] powerpc: respect how command line nr_cpus is set Kumar Gala
2011-05-05 2:25 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt [this message]
2011-05-05 11:38 ` Kumar Gala
2011-05-05 22:29 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2011-05-12 0:26 ` [RFC] " Milton Miller
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=1304562302.2513.418.camel@pasglop \
--to=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=galak@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).