From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [112.213.38.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EE52EC433F5 for ; Tue, 23 Nov 2021 05:17:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from boromir.ozlabs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4HyspZ3FMJz2yms for ; Tue, 23 Nov 2021 16:17:42 +1100 (AEDT) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20210112 header.b=B9Ul2ffC; dkim-atps=neutral Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com (client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::52f; helo=mail-pg1-x52f.google.com; envelope-from=npiggin@gmail.com; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20210112 header.b=B9Ul2ffC; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from mail-pg1-x52f.google.com (mail-pg1-x52f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::52f]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4Hysnq1PGhz2xX0 for ; Tue, 23 Nov 2021 16:17:03 +1100 (AEDT) Received: by mail-pg1-x52f.google.com with SMTP id p17so17261714pgj.2 for ; Mon, 22 Nov 2021 21:17:02 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=date:from:subject:to:references:in-reply-to:mime-version:message-id :content-transfer-encoding; bh=nMIda/GVtHF2sQ+5N9kCosjQ359vFrKXdNNulICpJ6s=; b=B9Ul2ffCsragWvZ+W15cB/uqoHfeQR63buK0hIT2epdiFGWb/6vnwKNWfh7iLHLICA AhCyO8cC51TVaAtBNOsQuVfIwMJgFHrdu4J3uQKM+IgIkppCWmqxLOmY9xYMb4Q5/a0R mXVRwylSHcQqZuK9w+K9uZVrm1k3o/QwOYs7eHbhz4clPi9Q9dl/t8wq7U5HbW9aUvNQ uiZ4c12F+RcxKhMzoxrZ0MWdO5l8QMB5kcJgtCpqa/f62+nk8fKMae+YDm4VAykjxbxk ghpA7XAlZ7eoB8gc+Ss3zR9EI0rjldoGY0Qe4giOzR/SQRkiibQfnLv45mfydY1iSMZr 0Vww== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:subject:to:references:in-reply-to :mime-version:message-id:content-transfer-encoding; bh=nMIda/GVtHF2sQ+5N9kCosjQ359vFrKXdNNulICpJ6s=; b=1m9L8MYsno1uUx+xe4Xc+QWB1VUpWPyDX4kp/IU2A0L3sUbVBgbEm+qS2iMGI1f+Rv 1t/BqzrKtet15C9B0eXC2NjdsfKMInI+Lh8qxQlttsULV+rQFV20R6BbYqiEcrp6CvRw mD2MnDMqu4f51UOxQTHGaMWqvb0wWawDwbwA+vl6B9HQXL+GLfVxwhfPN5NFf5BsXsjf 8bCmplHovF1rYx1Xy8EQYk84xZO0jpO0ecMByuK50RWFMwTabOtcowSkO6X9ExzhVU8n OWCuk8N0UPyA8qJcKdqcJcAC4FCNC498UHT46IGoiFn8D3LLA3TV2BOcXrjZswi7hwr2 oblQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531oF4jJ2GXpjvMB4EM7noQUiaQjgFhLhVwtyyCvOSQ8pWvBCRrY iTkpq0hksNp0LXz8HeEgIqIimpgQYxxm4w== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJx62AWnLB61S6UGsXrb5xVo3wHsWXLUBfb6WZfWyoU8unqYgkuas/xZmNAIjko7p+XFsp7cVA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a00:88b:b0:4a2:9c62:8865 with SMTP id q11-20020a056a00088b00b004a29c628865mr2613849pfj.46.1637644619912; Mon, 22 Nov 2021 21:16:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (220-244-84-117.tpgi.com.au. [220.244.84.117]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id j6sm10786829pfu.205.2021.11.22.21.16.58 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 22 Nov 2021 21:16:59 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2021 15:16:53 +1000 From: Nicholas Piggin Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] powerpc/64s: introduce CONFIG_MAXSMP to test very large SMP To: Christophe Leroy , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Michael Ellerman References: <20211109065131.2041720-1-npiggin@gmail.com> <87ilwzm18j.fsf@mpe.ellerman.id.au> <87czmrr8hb.fsf@mpe.ellerman.id.au> <1637644417.rd9apgh5k7.astroid@bobo.none> In-Reply-To: <1637644417.rd9apgh5k7.astroid@bobo.none> MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <1637644502.lzs9delw7v.astroid@bobo.none> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" Excerpts from Nicholas Piggin's message of November 23, 2021 3:14 pm: > Excerpts from Michael Ellerman's message of November 23, 2021 11:01 am: >> Michael Ellerman writes: >>> Christophe Leroy writes: >>>> Le 09/11/2021 =C3=A0 07:51, Nicholas Piggin a =C3=A9crit=C2=A0: >>> ... >>>>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/Kconfig.cputype b/arch/powerpc/pl= atforms/Kconfig.cputype >>>>> index a208997ade88..14c275e0ff93 100644 >>>>> --- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/Kconfig.cputype >>>>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/Kconfig.cputype >>>>> @@ -475,9 +475,14 @@ config SMP >>>>> =20 >>>>> If you don't know what to do here, say N. >>>>> =20 >>>>> +# MAXSMP sets 8192 if COMPILE_TEST because that's what x86 has flush= ed out. >>>>> +# Exceeding that will cause a lot of compile errors. Have to deal wi= th those >>>>> +# first. >>>>> config NR_CPUS >>>>> - int "Maximum number of CPUs (2-8192)" if SMP >>>>> - range 2 8192 if SMP >>>>> + int "Maximum number of CPUs (2-8192)" if SMP && !MAXSMP >>>>> + range 2 16384 if SMP >>>>> + default 16384 if MAXSMP && !COMPILE_TEST >>>>> + default 8192 if MAXSMP && COMPILE_TEST >>>> >>>> You can do less complex. First hit becomes the default, so you can do: >>>> >>>> default 8192 if MAXSMP && COMPILE_TEST >>>> default 16384 if MAXSMP >>> >>> I did that when applying. >>=20 >> But I'll have to drop it, it breaks the allyesconfig build: >=20 > Ah, you still need patch 1/2 sorry I confused things by only re-sending=20 > this one. >=20 > https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/linuxppc-dev/patch/20211105035042.13= 98309-1-npiggin@gmail.com/ Actually KVM will also be broken, I sent a patch for it but there is=20 some discussion of fixing it a different way. So maybe leave out the maxsmp patch for now (or make it depend on BROKEN?). I can re-send maybe next merge window if the other pieces are in place. If you could still take that ^^ patch for now would be good though. Thanks, Nick