All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [patch] x86: increase CONFIG_NODES_SHIFT max to 10
@ 2010-03-10 23:42 David Rientjes
  2010-03-11 13:23 ` Ingo Molnar
  2010-03-25 22:39 ` [patch v2] " David Rientjes
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: David Rientjes @ 2010-03-10 23:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Ingo Molnar, H. Peter Anvin, Thomas Gleixner; +Cc: x86, linux-kernel

Some larger systems require more than 512 nodes, so increase the maximum
CONFIG_NODES_SHIFT to 10 for a new max of 1024 nodes.

This was tested with numa=fake=64M on systems with more than 64GB of RAM.
A total of 1022 nodes were initialized.

Successfully builds with no additional warnings on x86_64 allyesconfig.

Signed-off-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
---
 Greg KH has queued up numa-fix-BUILD_BUG_ON-for-node_read_distance.patch
 for 2.6.35 to fix the build error when CONFIG_NODES_SHIFT is set to 10.
 See http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/3/10/390

 arch/x86/Kconfig |    4 ++--
 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/Kconfig b/arch/x86/Kconfig
--- a/arch/x86/Kconfig
+++ b/arch/x86/Kconfig
@@ -1213,8 +1213,8 @@ config NUMA_EMU
 
 config NODES_SHIFT
 	int "Maximum NUMA Nodes (as a power of 2)" if !MAXSMP
-	range 1 9
-	default "9" if MAXSMP
+	range 1 10
+	default "10" if MAXSMP
 	default "6" if X86_64
 	default "4" if X86_NUMAQ
 	default "3"

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [patch] x86: increase CONFIG_NODES_SHIFT max to 10
  2010-03-10 23:42 [patch] x86: increase CONFIG_NODES_SHIFT max to 10 David Rientjes
@ 2010-03-11 13:23 ` Ingo Molnar
  2010-03-11 14:06   ` Greg KH
  2010-03-25 22:39 ` [patch v2] " David Rientjes
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Ingo Molnar @ 2010-03-11 13:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: David Rientjes, Greg KH
  Cc: Ingo Molnar, H. Peter Anvin, Thomas Gleixner, x86, linux-kernel


* David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> wrote:

> Some larger systems require more than 512 nodes, so increase the maximum 
> CONFIG_NODES_SHIFT to 10 for a new max of 1024 nodes.
> 
> This was tested with numa=fake=64M on systems with more than 64GB of RAM. A 
> total of 1022 nodes were initialized.
> 
> Successfully builds with no additional warnings on x86_64 allyesconfig.

Not so here:

drivers/base/node.c:169: error: negative width in bit-field ?<anonymous>?

>  Greg KH has queued up numa-fix-BUILD_BUG_ON-for-node_read_distance.patch
>  for 2.6.35 to fix the build error when CONFIG_NODES_SHIFT is set to 10.
>  See http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/3/10/390

erm. Alas I cannot merge it in the x86 tree without that fix being upstream. 
Why for v2.6.35 - shouldnt that be v2.6.34?

	Ingo

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [patch] x86: increase CONFIG_NODES_SHIFT max to 10
  2010-03-11 13:23 ` Ingo Molnar
@ 2010-03-11 14:06   ` Greg KH
  2010-03-11 14:15     ` Ingo Molnar
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Greg KH @ 2010-03-11 14:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Ingo Molnar
  Cc: David Rientjes, Ingo Molnar, H. Peter Anvin, Thomas Gleixner,
	x86, linux-kernel

On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 02:23:54PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> * David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> wrote:
> 
> > Some larger systems require more than 512 nodes, so increase the maximum 
> > CONFIG_NODES_SHIFT to 10 for a new max of 1024 nodes.
> > 
> > This was tested with numa=fake=64M on systems with more than 64GB of RAM. A 
> > total of 1022 nodes were initialized.
> > 
> > Successfully builds with no additional warnings on x86_64 allyesconfig.
> 
> Not so here:
> 
> drivers/base/node.c:169: error: negative width in bit-field ?<anonymous>?
> 
> >  Greg KH has queued up numa-fix-BUILD_BUG_ON-for-node_read_distance.patch
> >  for 2.6.35 to fix the build error when CONFIG_NODES_SHIFT is set to 10.
> >  See http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/3/10/390

Well, it will be a few days before I queue it up...

> erm. Alas I cannot merge it in the x86 tree without that fix being upstream. 
> Why for v2.6.35 - shouldnt that be v2.6.34?

If it needs to go in before .35, or it should go through Ingo's trees, I
have no objection.

thanks,

greg k-h

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [patch] x86: increase CONFIG_NODES_SHIFT max to 10
  2010-03-11 14:06   ` Greg KH
@ 2010-03-11 14:15     ` Ingo Molnar
  2010-03-11 17:58       ` Greg KH
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Ingo Molnar @ 2010-03-11 14:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Greg KH
  Cc: David Rientjes, Ingo Molnar, H. Peter Anvin, Thomas Gleixner,
	x86, linux-kernel


* Greg KH <gregkh@suse.de> wrote:

> > erm. Alas I cannot merge it in the x86 tree without that fix being 
> > upstream. Why for v2.6.35 - shouldnt that be v2.6.34?
> 
> If it needs to go in before .35, or it should go through Ingo's trees, I 
> have no objection.

It does not 'need' to be in .34 but if the fix is trivial enough then you 
could give it a try?

	Ingo

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [patch] x86: increase CONFIG_NODES_SHIFT max to 10
  2010-03-11 14:15     ` Ingo Molnar
@ 2010-03-11 17:58       ` Greg KH
  2010-03-11 18:18         ` Ingo Molnar
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Greg KH @ 2010-03-11 17:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Ingo Molnar
  Cc: David Rientjes, Ingo Molnar, H. Peter Anvin, Thomas Gleixner,
	x86, linux-kernel

On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 03:15:33PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> * Greg KH <gregkh@suse.de> wrote:
> 
> > > erm. Alas I cannot merge it in the x86 tree without that fix being 
> > > upstream. Why for v2.6.35 - shouldnt that be v2.6.34?
> > 
> > If it needs to go in before .35, or it should go through Ingo's trees, I 
> > have no objection.
> 
> It does not 'need' to be in .34 but if the fix is trivial enough then you 
> could give it a try?

The fix is trivial, I'll queue it up.

thanks,

greg k-h

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [patch] x86: increase CONFIG_NODES_SHIFT max to 10
  2010-03-11 17:58       ` Greg KH
@ 2010-03-11 18:18         ` Ingo Molnar
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Ingo Molnar @ 2010-03-11 18:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Greg KH
  Cc: David Rientjes, Ingo Molnar, H. Peter Anvin, Thomas Gleixner,
	x86, linux-kernel


* Greg KH <gregkh@suse.de> wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 03:15:33PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > 
> > * Greg KH <gregkh@suse.de> wrote:
> > 
> > > > erm. Alas I cannot merge it in the x86 tree without that fix being 
> > > > upstream. Why for v2.6.35 - shouldnt that be v2.6.34?
> > > 
> > > If it needs to go in before .35, or it should go through Ingo's trees, I 
> > > have no objection.
> > 
> > It does not 'need' to be in .34 but if the fix is trivial enough then you 
> > could give it a try?
> 
> The fix is trivial, I'll queue it up.

Thanks Greg!

	Ingo

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* [patch v2] x86: increase CONFIG_NODES_SHIFT max to 10
  2010-03-10 23:42 [patch] x86: increase CONFIG_NODES_SHIFT max to 10 David Rientjes
  2010-03-11 13:23 ` Ingo Molnar
@ 2010-03-25 22:39 ` David Rientjes
  2010-04-02 19:06   ` [tip:x86/urgent] x86: Increase " tip-bot for David Rientjes
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: David Rientjes @ 2010-03-25 22:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Ingo Molnar, H. Peter Anvin, Thomas Gleixner; +Cc: x86, linux-kernel

Some larger systems require more than 512 nodes, so increase the maximum
CONFIG_NODES_SHIFT to 10 for a new max of 1024 nodes.

This was tested with numa=fake=64M on systems with more than 64GB of RAM.
A total of 1022 nodes were initialized.

Successfully builds with no additional warnings on x86_64 allyesconfig.

Signed-off-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
---
 The BUILD_BUG_ON() in drivers/base/node.c has been fixed in Linus' -git
 (see 12ee3c0), so CONFIG_NODES_SHIFT of 10 no longer fails to compile for
 x86_64 allyesconfig.

 arch/x86/Kconfig |    4 ++--
 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/Kconfig b/arch/x86/Kconfig
--- a/arch/x86/Kconfig
+++ b/arch/x86/Kconfig
@@ -1213,8 +1213,8 @@ config NUMA_EMU
 
 config NODES_SHIFT
 	int "Maximum NUMA Nodes (as a power of 2)" if !MAXSMP
-	range 1 9
-	default "9" if MAXSMP
+	range 1 10
+	default "10" if MAXSMP
 	default "6" if X86_64
 	default "4" if X86_NUMAQ
 	default "3"

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* [tip:x86/urgent] x86: Increase CONFIG_NODES_SHIFT max to 10
  2010-03-25 22:39 ` [patch v2] " David Rientjes
@ 2010-04-02 19:06   ` tip-bot for David Rientjes
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: tip-bot for David Rientjes @ 2010-04-02 19:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-tip-commits; +Cc: linux-kernel, hpa, mingo, tglx, rientjes, mingo

Commit-ID:  51591e31dcb3716f03f962e26ec36a029aa46340
Gitweb:     http://git.kernel.org/tip/51591e31dcb3716f03f962e26ec36a029aa46340
Author:     David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
AuthorDate: Thu, 25 Mar 2010 15:39:27 -0700
Committer:  Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
CommitDate: Fri, 2 Apr 2010 19:09:31 +0200

x86: Increase CONFIG_NODES_SHIFT max to 10

Some larger systems require more than 512 nodes, so increase the
maximum CONFIG_NODES_SHIFT to 10 for a new max of 1024 nodes.

This was tested with numa=fake=64M on systems with more than
64GB of RAM. A total of 1022 nodes were initialized.

Successfully builds with no additional warnings on x86_64
allyesconfig.

( No effect on any existing config. Newly enabled CONFIG_MAXSMP=y
  will see the new default. )

Signed-off-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
LKML-Reference: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1003251538060.8589@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
---
 arch/x86/Kconfig |    4 ++--
 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/Kconfig b/arch/x86/Kconfig
index 0eacb1f..9458685 100644
--- a/arch/x86/Kconfig
+++ b/arch/x86/Kconfig
@@ -1216,8 +1216,8 @@ config NUMA_EMU
 
 config NODES_SHIFT
 	int "Maximum NUMA Nodes (as a power of 2)" if !MAXSMP
-	range 1 9
-	default "9" if MAXSMP
+	range 1 10
+	default "10" if MAXSMP
 	default "6" if X86_64
 	default "4" if X86_NUMAQ
 	default "3"

^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2010-04-02 19:07 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2010-03-10 23:42 [patch] x86: increase CONFIG_NODES_SHIFT max to 10 David Rientjes
2010-03-11 13:23 ` Ingo Molnar
2010-03-11 14:06   ` Greg KH
2010-03-11 14:15     ` Ingo Molnar
2010-03-11 17:58       ` Greg KH
2010-03-11 18:18         ` Ingo Molnar
2010-03-25 22:39 ` [patch v2] " David Rientjes
2010-04-02 19:06   ` [tip:x86/urgent] x86: Increase " tip-bot for David Rientjes

This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.