Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86: get more exact nr_irqs

[Yinghai Lu]

On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 8:55 AM, Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Yinghai Lu <yinghai@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> first check with NR_VECTORS - FIRST_EXTERNAL_VECTOR - 0x20
>> aka minus exceptions and system vectors.
>>
>> NR_CPUS = 512, and nr_cpu_ids = 128
>> will have NR_IRQS = 256 + 512 * 64 = 33024
>>
>> assume we have 20 intel ixgbe 6 port cards (with sriov and ixgbevf)
>>       20 * 6 * 64 * 3 = 23040
>>
>> first will get:
>>       128 * (256 - 64) = 24576
>> then with nr_irqs_gsi will get
>>       (120 + 8 * 128 + 120 * 256) = 31864
>>
>> so 24576 will be used for nr_irqs.
>>
>> 24576 * 8 = 196608 bytes will be used for irq_desc_ptrs[]
>>
>> before this patch:
>>     have nr_irqs = 120 + 8 * 128 + 120 * 64 = 8824
>>       and irq_desc_ptrs[] is 70592
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> I am lost.    arch_probe_nr_irqs appears to be total nonsense.
>
> We have three concepts.
> - The number of irq sources we can talk about.  ( nr_irqs)
> - The number of irqs we can possibly service.   ((NR_VECTORS - 0x30) *nr_cpu_ids)
> - The number of irqs we actually connected up to cards in the
>  system that we need to do something with.
>
> Why do we need to allocate arrays at all?
>

irq_desc is allocated dynamically.

but irq_desc_ptrs is pointer array, it need to be allocated after
nr_irqs is probed.

YH
--
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/