From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Cc: Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@gmail.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Dhaval Giani <dhaval@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Mike Travis <travis@sgi.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86_64: Restore the proper NR_IRQS define so larger systems work.
Date: Sat, 02 Aug 2008 23:54:20 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4895561C.2030004@goop.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <m1sktm7ght.fsf@frodo.ebiederm.org>
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
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-08-03 6:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-08-02 2:02 [PATCH] x86: 64bit support more than 256 irq v2 Yinghai Lu
2008-08-02 2:16 ` Yinghai Lu
2008-08-02 2:58 ` Eric W. Biederman
2008-08-02 3:11 ` Yinghai Lu
2008-08-02 3:37 ` Eric W. Biederman
2008-08-04 13:20 ` Mike Travis
2008-08-04 18:16 ` Yinghai Lu
2008-08-03 5:09 ` Eric W. Biederman
2008-08-03 5:26 ` [PATCH] x86_64: Restore the proper NR_IRQS define so larger systems work Eric W. Biederman
2008-08-03 5:58 ` Yinghai Lu
2008-08-03 6:35 ` Eric W. Biederman
2008-08-03 6:54 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge [this message]
2008-08-03 6:44 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
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=4895561C.2030004@goop.org \
--to=jeremy@goop.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dhaval@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=travis@sgi.com \
--cc=yhlu.kernel@gmail.com \
/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