Andrew Morton <[email protected]> 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 [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
