Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 11 Jul 2005 09:21:47 -0600 (MDT) | From | Zwane Mwaikambo <> | Subject | Re: [RFC][PATCH] i386: Per node IDT |
| |
On Mon, 11 Jul 2005, Brian Gerst wrote:
> Zwane Mwaikambo wrote: > > On Sun, 11 Jul 2005, Andi Kleen wrote: > > > > > > > Why per node? Why not go the whole way and make it per CPU? > > > > > > I would also not define it statically, but allocate it at boot time > > > in node local memory. > > > > > > I went per node so that it would be minimal/zero impact for the no-node > > case, it would also simplify hotplug cpu since once a cpu in a node goes > > down, we still have other participating processors capable of handling its > > devices without having to do too much migration work. I'll definitely > > incorporate the node local allocations however, for some i386 systems we > > might be forced to stick some additional IDTs on node 0 since the IDTR will > > only take 32bit addresses and we could end up with only highmem on some > > nodes. > > Doesn't the IDTR take a virtual address? It has to or else the f00f bug fix > wouldn't work.
Yes you're right, i wasn't quite awake when i replied, thanks for correcting that.
Zwane
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |