Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 15 Jan 2003 11:05:53 -0800 | From | William Lee Irwin III <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] (0/7) Finish moving NUMA-Q into subarch, cleanup |
| |
On Wed, Jan 15, 2003 at 10:29:27AM -0800, Pallipadi, Venkatesh wrote: > Can these (MAX_IO_APICS, MAX_APICS) be moved to sub-arch too, instead of > replacing CONFIG NUMA by CONFIG NUMAQ?
Actually, I've also been feeling pain about MAX_IRQ_SOURCES, NR_IRQS, and HARDIRQ_BITS in addition to MAX_IO_APICS and MAX_APICS. I'll bet some ppl will have trouble with MAX_MP_BUSSES also, though I don't have any heavily-populated systems to stress that with.
There are also somewhat deeper issues with vector assignments to interrupt sources that prevent elevating any of the above to useful levels and utilizing them. The assumptions based on the vector assignment algorithm appear to be widely distributed enough to discourage me after an initial attempt or two to get any kind of useful interrupt routing for a number of IRQ sources larger than the number of vectors.
I pretty much reprogrammed the IDT to push only the vector and then still got interrupts on the wrong node(s) despite the physical broadcast RTE's plus (node, vector) <-> irq accounting and irq number lookup in do_IRQ().
Bill - 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/
| |