Re: [PATCH] x86_64: Restore the proper NR_IRQS define so larger systems work.

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge
Date: Saturday, August 2, 2008 - 11:54 pm

Eric W. Biederman wrote:

Yes, but really its overkill.  It needs about 6 interrupts/cpu for 
normal system overhead (timer, IPI, things like that), and then some 
amount for virtual devices.

dom0 - the control domain - will need some number of events per other 
guest domain, so it can start feeling the pressure depending on how many 
domains and devices there are.

    J
--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[PATCH] x86: 64bit support more than 256 irq v2, Yinghai Lu, (Fri Aug 1, 7:02 pm)
Re: [PATCH] x86: 64bit support more than 256 irq v2, Yinghai Lu, (Fri Aug 1, 7:16 pm)
Re: [PATCH] x86: 64bit support more than 256 irq v2, Eric W. Biederman, (Fri Aug 1, 7:58 pm)
Re: [PATCH] x86: 64bit support more than 256 irq v2, Yinghai Lu, (Fri Aug 1, 8:11 pm)
Re: [PATCH] x86: 64bit support more than 256 irq v2, Eric W. Biederman, (Fri Aug 1, 8:37 pm)
Re: [PATCH] x86: 64bit support more than 256 irq v2, Eric W. Biederman, (Sat Aug 2, 10:09 pm)
[PATCH] x86_64: Restore the proper NR_IRQS define so large ..., Eric W. Biederman, (Sat Aug 2, 10:26 pm)
Re: [PATCH] x86_64: Restore the proper NR_IRQS define so l ..., Eric W. Biederman, (Sat Aug 2, 11:35 pm)
Re: [PATCH] x86_64: Restore the proper NR_IRQS define so l ..., Jeremy Fitzhardinge, (Sat Aug 2, 11:44 pm)
Re: [PATCH] x86_64: Restore the proper NR_IRQS define so l ..., Jeremy Fitzhardinge, (Sat Aug 2, 11:54 pm)
Re: [PATCH] x86: 64bit support more than 256 irq v2, Mike Travis, (Mon Aug 4, 6:20 am)
Re: [PATCH] x86: 64bit support more than 256 irq v2, Yinghai Lu, (Mon Aug 4, 11:16 am)