Re: [PATCH 1/3 v3] Raise the upper limit of NR_CPUS.

On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 03:41:39PM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote: > You add about 30 lines of code in this patch, which you remove in patch > 3, is there a better way to do it? > > Is there any harm dynamically initialising the statically initialised > pacas, I think that would allow you to basi

Re: [PATCH 1/3 v3] Raise the upper limit of NR_CPUS.

On Wed, 2008-04-23 at 14:06 +1000, Tony Breeds wrote: > As the pacas are statically initialised increasing NR_CPUS beyond 128, > means that any additional pacas will be empty ... which is bad. > > This patch adds the required functionality to fill in any excess pacas > at runtime. > > Signed-off

[PATCH 1/3 v3] Raise the upper limit of NR_CPUS.

As the pacas are statically initialised increasing NR_CPUS beyond 128, means that any additional pacas will be empty ... which is bad. This patch adds the required functionality to fill in any excess pacas at runtime. Signed-off-by: Tony Breeds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- Changes since v1: - Addres