Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 11 Jun 2002 05:23:50 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 11 Jun 2002 05:23:49 -0400 Received: from parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk ([195.92.249.252]:35597 "EHLO www.linux.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 11 Jun 2002 05:23:48 -0400 Message-ID: <3D05C27D.186DC066@zip.com.au> Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 02:27:25 -0700 From: Andrew Morton X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.19-pre9 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Rusty Russell CC: torvalds@transmeta.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, k-suganuma@mvj.biglobe.ne.jp Subject: Re: [PATCH] 2.5.21 Nonlinear CPU support In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 11 Jun 2002 00:42:32 MST." <3D05A9E8.FF0DA223@zip.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Rusty Russell wrote: > > ... > Let's not perpetuate the myth that everything in the kernel needs to > be tuned to the last cycle at all costs, hm? I was more concerned about the RAM use, actually. This patch is an additional reason for CONFIG_NR_CPUS, but I've rather gone cold on that idea because the "proper fix" is to make all those huge per-cpu arrays dynamically allocated. So you can run a 64p kernel on 2p without losing hundreds of k of memory and kernel address space. But it looks like all those dynamically-allocated structures would have to be allocated out to NR_CPUS anyway, to support hotplug, yes? In which case, CONFIG_NR_CPUS is the only way to get the memory back... - - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/