lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Jul]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: 2.6.17-mm6
Date
Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> writes:

> Maybe not. If we do this, we lose the pretty CPUn columns in
> /proc/interrupts. That /proc/interrupts display requires that we maintain
> NR_CPUS*NR_IRQS counters.
>
> Given that a large NR_IRQs space will be sparsely populated, we should
> dynamically allocate the NR_CPUS storage for each active IRQ, as you say.
>
> That involves putting it into the irq_desc (as good a place as any). And a
> rather large number of trivial edits. I guess we do this only for genirq?

Actually I rechecked. There is one alpha box that defines
NR_IRQS to be 32K. Which should hit this same problem if anyone
ever compiles it.

So this may actually seems to be an issue independent of genirq.

Eric

-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2006-07-06 18:53    [W:0.123 / U:0.416 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site