Re: [RFC] killing the NR_IRQS arrays.

[Eric W. Biederman]

Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx> writes:

> Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> So I propose we remove all assumptions from the code that we actually
>> have an array of irqs.  That will allow for irq_desc to be dynamically
>> allocated instead of statically allocated saving memory and reducing
>> kernel complexity.
>>   
>
> Sounds good to me.  In Xen we have 1024 event channels which we need to
> map down into a smaller irq.  Aside from the complexity of maintaining a
> mapping table, that's not a huge issue for now, but when we start
> exposing pci devices to guests it all becomes more complex.  The ideal
> for us is to simply use event channel == irq, which this would allow.

Well you shouldn't need to wait just run with a kernel with NR_IRQS >= 1024.
1024 is stretch but it isn't to bad.  There are already x86 boxes that have
more pins on their ioapics then that. So x86_64 and with this latest
round of patches from Len Brown and I i386 should be able to support that.

On the other side 1024 looks extremely limiting for exposing pci devices.  
If someone gets serious about pushing what is legal with MSI-X you may be
in trouble.  As a single device is allowed to have 4096 interrupts.   Not
that I can think of a user for so many but...

Eric
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/