[PATCH] x86: 64bit support more than 256 irq v2

[PATCH] x86: 64bit support more than 256 irq v2

[Yinghai Lu]

Dhaval Giani got:
kernel BUG at arch/x86/kernel/io_apic_64.c:357!
invalid opcode: 0000 [1] SMP
CPU 24
...

his system (x3950) has 8 ioapic, irq > 256

caused by
        commit 9b7dc567d03d74a1fbae84e88949b6a60d922d82
        Author: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
        Date:   Fri May 2 20:10:09 2008 +0200

           x86: unify interrupt vector defines

           The interrupt vector defines are copied 4 times around with minimal
           differences. Move them all into asm-x86/irq_vectors.h

because 64bit allow same vector for different cpu to serve different irq

need to create that array dynamically later

v2: change NR_IRQS to 1024

Signed-off-by: Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@gmail.com>
Tested-by: Dhaval Giani <dhaval@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

---
 include/asm-x86/irq_vectors.h |   12 +++---------
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
Index: linux-2.6/include/asm-x86/irq_vectors.h
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.orig/include/asm-x86/irq_vectors.h
+++ linux-2.6/include/asm-x86/irq_vectors.h
@@ -113,28 +113,22 @@
 
 # if defined(CONFIG_X86_IO_APIC) || defined(CONFIG_PARAVIRT) || defined(CONFIG_X86_VISWS)
 
-#  define NR_IRQS		224
-
-#  if (224 >= 32 * NR_CPUS)
-#   define NR_IRQ_VECTORS	NR_IRQS
-#  else
-#   define NR_IRQ_VECTORS	(32 * NR_CPUS)
-#  endif
+#define NR_IRQS			1024
 
 # else /* IO_APIC || PARAVIRT */
 
 #  define NR_IRQS		16
-#  define NR_IRQ_VECTORS	NR_IRQS
 
 # endif
 
 #else /* !VISWS && !VOYAGER */
 
 # define NR_IRQS		224
-# define NR_IRQ_VECTORS		NR_IRQS
 
 #endif /* VISWS */
 
+#define NR_IRQ_VECTORS		NR_IRQS
+
 /* Voyager specific defines */
 /* These define the CPIs we use in linux */
 #define VIC_CPI_LEVEL0			0

Re: [PATCH] x86: 64bit support more than 256 irq v2

[Yinghai Lu]

On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 7:02 PM, Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dhaval Giani got:
> kernel BUG at arch/x86/kernel/io_apic_64.c:357!
> invalid opcode: 0000 [1] SMP
> CPU 24
> ...
>
> his system (x3950) has 8 ioapic, irq > 256
>
> caused by
>        commit 9b7dc567d03d74a1fbae84e88949b6a60d922d82
>        Author: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
>        Date:   Fri May 2 20:10:09 2008 +0200
>
>           x86: unify interrupt vector defines
>
>           The interrupt vector defines are copied 4 times around with minimal
>           differences. Move them all into asm-x86/irq_vectors.h
>
> because 64bit allow same vector for different cpu to serve different irq
>
> need to create that array dynamically later
>
> v2: change NR_IRQS to 1024
>
> Signed-off-by: Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@gmail.com>
> Tested-by: Dhaval Giani <dhaval@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

this is for
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11201

but need SGI guys to verify in their system. they like to have NR_IRQS to be 224

otherwise we need to use dyn_array solution or wait for Eric come out
dyn irq_desc/irq_cfg

YH

Re: [PATCH] x86: 64bit support more than 256 irq v2

[Eric W. Biederman]

"Yinghai Lu" <yhlu.kernel@gmail.com> writes:

> On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 7:02 PM, Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Dhaval Giani got:
>> kernel BUG at arch/x86/kernel/io_apic_64.c:357!
>> invalid opcode: 0000 [1] SMP
>> CPU 24
>> ...
>>
>> his system (x3950) has 8 ioapic, irq > 256
>>
>> caused by
>>        commit 9b7dc567d03d74a1fbae84e88949b6a60d922d82
>>        Author: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
>>        Date:   Fri May 2 20:10:09 2008 +0200
>>
>>           x86: unify interrupt vector defines
>>
>>           The interrupt vector defines are copied 4 times around with minimal
>>           differences. Move them all into asm-x86/irq_vectors.h
>>
>> because 64bit allow same vector for different cpu to serve different irq
>>
>> need to create that array dynamically later
>>
>> v2: change NR_IRQS to 1024
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@gmail.com>
>> Tested-by: Dhaval Giani <dhaval@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>
> this is for
> http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11201
>
> but need SGI guys to verify in their system. they like to have NR_IRQS to be 224

There was a patch that came out a while ago that set NR_IRQS as NR_IOAPICS*32 from
SGI.  Where that got to I don't recall.

Eric

Re: [PATCH] x86: 64bit support more than 256 irq v2

[Yinghai Lu]

On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 7:58 PM, Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com> wrote:
> "Yinghai Lu" <yhlu.kernel@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 7:02 PM, Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Dhaval Giani got:
>>> kernel BUG at arch/x86/kernel/io_apic_64.c:357!
>>> invalid opcode: 0000 [1] SMP
>>> CPU 24
>>> ...
>>>
>>> his system (x3950) has 8 ioapic, irq > 256
..
>
> There was a patch that came out a while ago that set NR_IRQS as NR_IOAPICS*32 from
> SGI.  Where that got to I don't recall.

#ifdef CONFIG_X86_32
# define MAX_IO_APICS 64
#else
# define MAX_IO_APICS 128
# define MAX_LOCAL_APIC 32768
#endif

so they can take 128*32 = 4096?

YH

Re: [PATCH] x86: 64bit support more than 256 irq v2

[Eric W. Biederman]

"Yinghai Lu" <yhlu.kernel@gmail.com> writes:

> On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 7:58 PM, Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com> wrote:
>> "Yinghai Lu" <yhlu.kernel@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 7:02 PM, Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Dhaval Giani got:
>>>> kernel BUG at arch/x86/kernel/io_apic_64.c:357!
>>>> invalid opcode: 0000 [1] SMP
>>>> CPU 24
>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>> his system (x3950) has 8 ioapic, irq > 256
> ..
>>
>> There was a patch that came out a while ago that set NR_IRQS as NR_IOAPICS*32
> from
>> SGI.  Where that got to I don't recall.
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_X86_32
> # define MAX_IO_APICS 64
> #else
> # define MAX_IO_APICS 128
> # define MAX_LOCAL_APIC 32768
> #endif
>
> so they can take 128*32 = 4096?

Yes.  The real problem was just the complete explosion of irqs on SGI
machines that have paltry I/O to the outside world compared to their cpu
count.  Have 131072 irqs seemed a little much for them.

It is all a game of tuning heuristics right now, and if we can totally
kill NR_IRQS it all goes away.  But that is an issue to solve before
the next merge window not to kill the regression.

Eric

Re: [PATCH] x86: 64bit support more than 256 irq v2

[Mike Travis]

Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> "Yinghai Lu" <yhlu.kernel@gmail.com> writes:
> 
>> On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 7:02 PM, Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Dhaval Giani got:
>>> kernel BUG at arch/x86/kernel/io_apic_64.c:357!
>>> invalid opcode: 0000 [1] SMP
>>> CPU 24
>>> ...
>>>
>>> his system (x3950) has 8 ioapic, irq > 256
>>>
>>> caused by
>>>        commit 9b7dc567d03d74a1fbae84e88949b6a60d922d82
>>>        Author: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
>>>        Date:   Fri May 2 20:10:09 2008 +0200
>>>
>>>           x86: unify interrupt vector defines
>>>
>>>           The interrupt vector defines are copied 4 times around with minimal
>>>           differences. Move them all into asm-x86/irq_vectors.h
>>>
>>> because 64bit allow same vector for different cpu to serve different irq
>>>
>>> need to create that array dynamically later
>>>
>>> v2: change NR_IRQS to 1024
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@gmail.com>
>>> Tested-by: Dhaval Giani <dhaval@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>> this is for
>> http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11201
>>
>> but need SGI guys to verify in their system. they like to have NR_IRQS to be 224
> 
> There was a patch that came out a while ago that set NR_IRQS as NR_IOAPICS*32 from
> SGI.  Where that got to I don't recall.
> 
> Eric

That was from Alan ... I'll Cc: him.  Here's an early copy (not sure if
this was the final one though.)


>From: Alan Mayer <ajm@sgi.com>
Subject:  [PATCH] x86_64: resize NR_IRQS for large machines

On machines with very large numbers of cpus, tables that are dimensioned
by NR_IRQS get very large, especially the irq_desc table.  They are also
very sparsely used.  When the cpu count is > MAX_IO_APICS, use MAX_IO_APICS
to set NR_IRQS, otherwise use NR_CPUS.

Reviewed-by: Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com>

Signed-off-by: Alan Mayer <ajm@sgi.com>
Index: v2.6.25-rc6/include/asm-x86/irq_64.h
===================================================================
--- v2.6.25-rc6.orig/include/asm-x86/irq_64.h	2008-03-19 16:52:52.000000000 -0500
+++ v2.6.25-rc6/include/asm-x86/irq_64.h	2008-03-20 16:46:51.000000000 -0500
@@ -10,6 +10,10 @@
  *	<tomsoft@informatik.tu-chemnitz.de>
  */
 
+#if !defined(MAX_IO_APICS)
+#include <asm/apicdef.h>
+#endif
+
 #define TIMER_IRQ 0
 
 /*
@@ -31,7 +35,11 @@
 
 #define FIRST_SYSTEM_VECTOR	0xef   /* duplicated in hw_irq.h */
 
-#define NR_IRQS (NR_VECTORS + (32 *NR_CPUS))
+#if NR_CPUS < MAX_IO_APICS
+#define NR_IRQS (NR_VECTORS + (32 * NR_CPUS))
+#else
+#define NR_IRQS (NR_VECTORS + (32 * MAX_IO_APICS))
+#endif
 #define NR_IRQ_VECTORS NR_IRQS
 
 static __inline__ int irq_canonicalize(int irq)
Index: v2.6.25-rc6/include/linux/kernel_stat.h
===================================================================
--- v2.6.25-rc6.orig/include/linux/kernel_stat.h	2008-03-19 16:53:00.000000000 -0500
+++ v2.6.25-rc6/include/linux/kernel_stat.h	2008-03-20 11:12:27.000000000 -0500
@@ -1,11 +1,11 @@
 #ifndef _LINUX_KERNEL_STAT_H
 #define _LINUX_KERNEL_STAT_H
 
-#include <asm/irq.h>
 #include <linux/smp.h>
 #include <linux/threads.h>
 #include <linux/percpu.h>
 #include <linux/cpumask.h>
+#include <asm/irq.h>
 #include <asm/cputime.h>
 
 /*

Re: [PATCH] x86: 64bit support more than 256 irq v2

[Yinghai Lu]

On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 6:20 AM, Mike Travis <travis@sgi.com> wrote:
> Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> "Yinghai Lu" <yhlu.kernel@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 7:02 PM, Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Dhaval Giani got:
>>>> kernel BUG at arch/x86/kernel/io_apic_64.c:357!
>>>> invalid opcode: 0000 [1] SMP
>>>> CPU 24
>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>> his system (x3950) has 8 ioapic, irq > 256
>>>>
>>>> caused by
>>>>        commit 9b7dc567d03d74a1fbae84e88949b6a60d922d82
>>>>        Author: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
>>>>        Date:   Fri May 2 20:10:09 2008 +0200
>>>>
>>>>           x86: unify interrupt vector defines
>>>>
>>>>           The interrupt vector defines are copied 4 times around with minimal
>>>>           differences. Move them all into asm-x86/irq_vectors.h
>>>>
>>>> because 64bit allow same vector for different cpu to serve different irq
>>>>
>>>> need to create that array dynamically later
>>>>
>>>> v2: change NR_IRQS to 1024
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@gmail.com>
>>>> Tested-by: Dhaval Giani <dhaval@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>>> this is for
>>> http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11201
>>>
>>> but need SGI guys to verify in their system. they like to have NR_IRQS to be 224
>>
>> There was a patch that came out a while ago that set NR_IRQS as NR_IOAPICS*32 from
>> SGI.  Where that got to I don't recall.
>>
>> Eric
>
> That was from Alan ... I'll Cc: him.  Here's an early copy (not sure if
> this was the final one though.)
>
>
>>From: Alan Mayer <ajm@sgi.com>
> Subject:  [PATCH] x86_64: resize NR_IRQS for large machines
>
> On machines with very large numbers of cpus, tables that are dimensioned
> by NR_IRQS get very large, especially the irq_desc table.  They are also
> very sparsely used.  When the cpu count is > MAX_IO_APICS, use MAX_IO_APICS
> to set NR_IRQS, otherwise use NR_CPUS.
>
> Reviewed-by: Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com>
>
> Signed-off-by: Alan Mayer <ajm@sgi.com>
> Index: v2.6.25-rc6/include/asm-x86/irq_64.h
> ===================================================================
> --- v2.6.25-rc6.orig/include/asm-x86/irq_64.h   2008-03-19 16:52:52.000000000 -0500
> +++ v2.6.25-rc6/include/asm-x86/irq_64.h        2008-03-20 16:46:51.000000000 -0500
> @@ -10,6 +10,10 @@
>  *     <tomsoft@informatik.tu-chemnitz.de>
>  */
>
> +#if !defined(MAX_IO_APICS)
> +#include <asm/apicdef.h>
> +#endif
> +
>  #define TIMER_IRQ 0
>
>  /*
> @@ -31,7 +35,11 @@
>
>  #define FIRST_SYSTEM_VECTOR    0xef   /* duplicated in hw_irq.h */
>
> -#define NR_IRQS (NR_VECTORS + (32 *NR_CPUS))
> +#if NR_CPUS < MAX_IO_APICS
> +#define NR_IRQS (NR_VECTORS + (32 * NR_CPUS))
> +#else
> +#define NR_IRQS (NR_VECTORS + (32 * MAX_IO_APICS))
> +#endif
>  #define NR_IRQ_VECTORS NR_IRQS
>
>  static __inline__ int irq_canonicalize(int irq)
> Index: v2.6.25-rc6/include/linux/kernel_stat.h
> ===================================================================
> --- v2.6.25-rc6.orig/include/linux/kernel_stat.h        2008-03-19 16:53:00.000000000 -0500
> +++ v2.6.25-rc6/include/linux/kernel_stat.h     2008-03-20 11:12:27.000000000 -0500
> @@ -1,11 +1,11 @@
>  #ifndef _LINUX_KERNEL_STAT_H
>  #define _LINUX_KERNEL_STAT_H
>
> -#include <asm/irq.h>
>  #include <linux/smp.h>
>  #include <linux/threads.h>
>  #include <linux/percpu.h>
>  #include <linux/cpumask.h>
> +#include <asm/irq.h>
>  #include <asm/cputime.h>
>
>  /*
>

so this one have right sequence...

could add sth say why need special including sequence...

YH

Re: [PATCH] x86: 64bit support more than 256 irq v2

[Eric W. Biederman]

Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@gmail.com> writes:

> Dhaval Giani got:
> kernel BUG at arch/x86/kernel/io_apic_64.c:357!
> invalid opcode: 0000 [1] SMP
> CPU 24
> ...
>
> his system (x3950) has 8 ioapic, irq > 256
>
> caused by
>         commit 9b7dc567d03d74a1fbae84e88949b6a60d922d82
>         Author: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
>         Date:   Fri May 2 20:10:09 2008 +0200
>
>            x86: unify interrupt vector defines
>
>            The interrupt vector defines are copied 4 times around with minimal
>            differences. Move them all into asm-x86/irq_vectors.h
>
> because 64bit allow same vector for different cpu to serve different irq
>
> need to create that array dynamically later

YH Thank you for splitting this out.  This still doesn't restore the
pre merge NR_IRQS heuristic.  So I don't think it is a proper regression fix.

Eric

[PATCH] x86_64: Restore the proper NR_IRQS define so larger systems work.

[Eric W. Biederman]

As pointed out and tracked by Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@gmail.com>:

Dhaval Giani got:
kernel BUG at arch/x86/kernel/io_apic_64.c:357!
invalid opcode: 0000 [1] SMP
CPU 24
...

his system (x3950) has 8 ioapic, irq > 256

This was caused by:
        commit 9b7dc567d03d74a1fbae84e88949b6a60d922d82
        Author: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
        Date:   Fri May 2 20:10:09 2008 +0200

           x86: unify interrupt vector defines

           The interrupt vector defines are copied 4 times around with minimal
           differences. Move them all into asm-x86/irq_vectors.h

It appears that Thomas did not notice that x86_64 does something
completely different when he merge irq_vectors.h

We can solve this for 2.6.27 by simply reintroducing the old heuristic
for setting NR_IRQS on x86_64 to a usable value, which trivially removes
the regression.

Long term it would be nice to harmonize the handling of ioapic interrupts
of x86_32 and x86_64 so we don't have this kind of confusion.

Dhaval Giani <dhaval@linux.vnet.ibm.com> tested an earlier version of
this patch by YH which confirms simply increasing NR_IRQS fixes the
problem.

Signed-off-by: Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com>
---
 include/asm-x86/irq_vectors.h |   10 +++++++++-
 1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/asm-x86/irq_vectors.h b/include/asm-x86/irq_vectors.h
index 90b1d1f..a13eb6c 100644
--- a/include/asm-x86/irq_vectors.h
+++ b/include/asm-x86/irq_vectors.h
@@ -109,7 +109,15 @@
 #define LAST_VM86_IRQ		15
 #define invalid_vm86_irq(irq)	((irq) < 3 || (irq) > 15)
 
-#if !defined(CONFIG_X86_VOYAGER)
+#ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
+# if NR_CPUS < MAX_IO_APICS
+#  define NR_IRQS (NR_VECTORS + (32 * NR_CPUS))
+# else
+#  define NR_IRQS (NR_VECTORS + (32 * MAX_IO_APICS ))
+# endif
+# define NR_IRQ_VECTORS NR_IRQS
+
+#elif !defined(CONFIG_X86_VOYAGER)
 
 # if defined(CONFIG_X86_IO_APIC) || defined(CONFIG_PARAVIRT) || defined(CONFIG_X86_VISWS)
 
-- 
1.5.3.rc6.17.g1911

Re: [PATCH] x86_64: Restore the proper NR_IRQS define so larger systems work.

[Yinghai Lu]

On Sat, Aug 2, 2008 at 10:26 PM, Eric W. Biederman
<ebiederm@xmission.com> wrote:
>
> As pointed out and tracked by Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@gmail.com>:
>
> Dhaval Giani got:
> kernel BUG at arch/x86/kernel/io_apic_64.c:357!
> invalid opcode: 0000 [1] SMP
> CPU 24
> ...
>
> his system (x3950) has 8 ioapic, irq > 256
>
> This was caused by:
>        commit 9b7dc567d03d74a1fbae84e88949b6a60d922d82
>        Author: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
>        Date:   Fri May 2 20:10:09 2008 +0200
>
>           x86: unify interrupt vector defines
>
>           The interrupt vector defines are copied 4 times around with minimal
>           differences. Move them all into asm-x86/irq_vectors.h
>
> It appears that Thomas did not notice that x86_64 does something
> completely different when he merge irq_vectors.h
>
> We can solve this for 2.6.27 by simply reintroducing the old heuristic
> for setting NR_IRQS on x86_64 to a usable value, which trivially removes
> the regression.
>
> Long term it would be nice to harmonize the handling of ioapic interrupts
> of x86_32 and x86_64 so we don't have this kind of confusion.
>
> Dhaval Giani <dhaval@linux.vnet.ibm.com> tested an earlier version of
> this patch by YH which confirms simply increasing NR_IRQS fixes the
> problem.
>
> Signed-off-by: Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com>
> ---
>  include/asm-x86/irq_vectors.h |   10 +++++++++-
>  1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/asm-x86/irq_vectors.h b/include/asm-x86/irq_vectors.h
> index 90b1d1f..a13eb6c 100644
> --- a/include/asm-x86/irq_vectors.h
> +++ b/include/asm-x86/irq_vectors.h
> @@ -109,7 +109,15 @@
>  #define LAST_VM86_IRQ          15
>  #define invalid_vm86_irq(irq)  ((irq) < 3 || (irq) > 15)
>
> -#if !defined(CONFIG_X86_VOYAGER)
> +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
> +# if NR_CPUS < MAX_IO_APICS
> +#  define NR_IRQS (NR_VECTORS + (32 * NR_CPUS))
> +# else
> +#  define NR_IRQS (NR_VECTORS + (32 * MAX_IO_APICS ))
> +# endif
> +# define NR_IRQ_VECTORS NR_IRQS
> +
> +#elif !defined(CONFIG_X86_VOYAGER)
>
>  # if defined(CONFIG_X86_IO_APIC) || defined(CONFIG_PARAVIRT) || defined(CONFIG_X86_VISWS)
>

what should xen pv 64 get for NR_IRQS?

YH

Re: [PATCH] x86_64: Restore the proper NR_IRQS define so larger systems work.

[Eric W. Biederman]

"Yinghai Lu" <yhlu.kernel@gmail.com> writes:


> what should xen pv 64 get for NR_IRQS?

Xen pv 64 will work at least as well with a larger definition for
NR_IRQS as it will work with a smaller definition, and since
NR_VECTORS is 256 we always have more irqs with the 32bit definition
we were mistakenly using. 

Xen has 1024 event channels so I expect 1024 would the nice number to
provide there.

Eric

Re: [PATCH] x86_64: Restore the proper NR_IRQS define so larger systems work.

[Jeremy Fitzhardinge]

Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Xen pv 64 will work at least as well with a larger definition for
> NR_IRQS as it will work with a smaller definition, and since
> NR_VECTORS is 256 we always have more irqs with the 32bit definition
> we were mistakenly using. 
>
> Xen has 1024 event channels so I expect 1024 would the nice number to
> provide there.
>   

Yes, but really its overkill.  It needs about 6 interrupts/cpu for 
normal system overhead (timer, IPI, things like that), and then some 
amount for virtual devices.

dom0 - the control domain - will need some number of events per other 
guest domain, so it can start feeling the pressure depending on how many 
domains and devices there are.

    J

Re: [PATCH] x86_64: Restore the proper NR_IRQS define so larger systems work.

[Jeremy Fitzhardinge]

Yinghai Lu wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 2, 2008 at 10:26 PM, Eric W. Biederman
> <ebiederm@xmission.com> wrote:
>   
>> As pointed out and tracked by Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@gmail.com>:
>>
>> Dhaval Giani got:
>> kernel BUG at arch/x86/kernel/io_apic_64.c:357!
>> invalid opcode: 0000 [1] SMP
>> CPU 24
>> ...
>>
>> his system (x3950) has 8 ioapic, irq > 256
>>
>> This was caused by:
>>        commit 9b7dc567d03d74a1fbae84e88949b6a60d922d82
>>        Author: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
>>        Date:   Fri May 2 20:10:09 2008 +0200
>>
>>           x86: unify interrupt vector defines
>>
>>           The interrupt vector defines are copied 4 times around with minimal
>>           differences. Move them all into asm-x86/irq_vectors.h
>>
>> It appears that Thomas did not notice that x86_64 does something
>> completely different when he merge irq_vectors.h
>>
>> We can solve this for 2.6.27 by simply reintroducing the old heuristic
>> for setting NR_IRQS on x86_64 to a usable value, which trivially removes
>> the regression.
>>
>> Long term it would be nice to harmonize the handling of ioapic interrupts
>> of x86_32 and x86_64 so we don't have this kind of confusion.
>>
>> Dhaval Giani <dhaval@linux.vnet.ibm.com> tested an earlier version of
>> this patch by YH which confirms simply increasing NR_IRQS fixes the
>> problem.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com>
>> ---
>>  include/asm-x86/irq_vectors.h |   10 +++++++++-
>>  1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/include/asm-x86/irq_vectors.h b/include/asm-x86/irq_vectors.h
>> index 90b1d1f..a13eb6c 100644
>> --- a/include/asm-x86/irq_vectors.h
>> +++ b/include/asm-x86/irq_vectors.h
>> @@ -109,7 +109,15 @@
>>  #define LAST_VM86_IRQ          15
>>  #define invalid_vm86_irq(irq)  ((irq) < 3 || (irq) > 15)
>>
>> -#if !defined(CONFIG_X86_VOYAGER)
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
>> +# if NR_CPUS < MAX_IO_APICS
>> +#  define NR_IRQS (NR_VECTORS + (32 * NR_CPUS))
>> +# else
>> +#  define NR_IRQS (NR_VECTORS + (32 * MAX_IO_APICS ))
>> +# endif
>> +# define NR_IRQ_VECTORS NR_IRQS
>> +
>> +#elif !defined(CONFIG_X86_VOYAGER)
>>
>>  # if defined(CONFIG_X86_IO_APIC) || defined(CONFIG_PARAVIRT) || defined(CONFIG_X86_VISWS)
>>
>>     
>
> what should xen pv 64 get for NR_IRQS?
>   

Much the same as usual; perhaps a bit lower.  16/CPU would probably be 
ample.

But given that the kernel also needs to be able to boot native properly, 
just choosing the normal number would be best.

I long for the day it becomes dynamic...

    J