In message <alpine.lrh.2.00.0905180857060.16...@vixen.sonytel.be> you wrote: > On Mon, 18 May 2009, Michael Neuling wrote: > > > > We can compile and boot with NR_CPUS=3D8192, so make this the max. 102 4 > > > > was an arbitrary decision anyway. > > > > > > Is 8192 still arbitrary? Or does something break above that? > > > > Yeah, the compile breaks after that with 4K pages. > > > > In drivers/base/node.c we have: > > /* 2008/04/07: buf currently PAGE_SIZE, need 9 chars per 32 bits. */ > > BUILD_BUG_ON((NR_CPUS/32 * 9) > (PAGE_SIZE-1)); > > which causes: > > drivers/base/node.c: In function 'node_read_cpumap': > > drivers/base/node.c:31: error: size of array 'type name' is negative > > > > I can compile with 16384 CPUs with 64K pages, but it doesn't boot. > > > > sfr asked for size info for different builds, so I may as well repost > > them here: > > > > text data bss dec hex filenam e > > 9237767 3225768 4409996 16873531 101783b vmlinux .1024 > > 9247355 4769472 7373708 21390535 14664c7 vmlinux .2048 > > 9267239 7857032 13301132 30425403 1d0413b vmlinux .4096 > > 9302623 14035832 25155980 48494435 2e3f763 vmlinux .8192 > > 9373283 26389360 48865676 84628319 50b535f vmlinux .16384 > > Will distros now start pushing NR_CPUS=8192-kernels on us?
Yeah, that's a concern. Mikey _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
