Drop cpumask auto select patch and set NR_CPUS appropriately
We've been carrying a patch to make CPUMASK_OFFSTACK selectable without debugging for a long time now. The comment said this was going to be replaced with something else but that never seemed to happen. We're carrying it to have a higher number of CPUs but at this point, adjusting NR_CPUS doesn't really get us that much benfit. Drop the patch and just use 8192 or NR_CPUS on x86. Signed-off-by: Laura Abbott <labbott@redhat.com>
This commit is contained in:
parent
9a47638b3d
commit
9742e529b8
@ -1 +1 @@
|
|||||||
# CONFIG_MAXSMP is not set
|
CONFIG_MAXSMP=y
|
||||||
|
@ -1 +1 @@
|
|||||||
CONFIG_NR_CPUS=1024
|
CONFIG_NR_CPUS=8192
|
||||||
|
@ -2915,7 +2915,7 @@ CONFIG_MAX44009=m
|
|||||||
# CONFIG_MAX9611 is not set
|
# CONFIG_MAX9611 is not set
|
||||||
CONFIG_MAXIM_THERMOCOUPLE=m
|
CONFIG_MAXIM_THERMOCOUPLE=m
|
||||||
CONFIG_MAX_RAW_DEVS=8192
|
CONFIG_MAX_RAW_DEVS=8192
|
||||||
# CONFIG_MAXSMP is not set
|
CONFIG_MAXSMP=y
|
||||||
CONFIG_MB1232=m
|
CONFIG_MB1232=m
|
||||||
# CONFIG_MC3230 is not set
|
# CONFIG_MC3230 is not set
|
||||||
# CONFIG_MCB is not set
|
# CONFIG_MCB is not set
|
||||||
|
@ -2965,7 +2965,7 @@ CONFIG_MAX44009=m
|
|||||||
# CONFIG_MAX9611 is not set
|
# CONFIG_MAX9611 is not set
|
||||||
CONFIG_MAXIM_THERMOCOUPLE=m
|
CONFIG_MAXIM_THERMOCOUPLE=m
|
||||||
CONFIG_MAX_RAW_DEVS=8192
|
CONFIG_MAX_RAW_DEVS=8192
|
||||||
# CONFIG_MAXSMP is not set
|
CONFIG_MAXSMP=y
|
||||||
CONFIG_MB1232=m
|
CONFIG_MB1232=m
|
||||||
# CONFIG_MC3230 is not set
|
# CONFIG_MC3230 is not set
|
||||||
# CONFIG_MCB is not set
|
# CONFIG_MCB is not set
|
||||||
@ -3920,7 +3920,7 @@ CONFIG_NOUVEAU_DEBUG_DEFAULT=3
|
|||||||
# CONFIG_NOUVEAU_DEBUG_MMU is not set
|
# CONFIG_NOUVEAU_DEBUG_MMU is not set
|
||||||
# CONFIG_NOUVEAU_LEGACY_CTX_SUPPORT is not set
|
# CONFIG_NOUVEAU_LEGACY_CTX_SUPPORT is not set
|
||||||
CONFIG_NOZOMI=m
|
CONFIG_NOZOMI=m
|
||||||
CONFIG_NR_CPUS=1024
|
CONFIG_NR_CPUS=8192
|
||||||
CONFIG_NS83820=m
|
CONFIG_NS83820=m
|
||||||
CONFIG_NTB_AMD=m
|
CONFIG_NTB_AMD=m
|
||||||
CONFIG_NTB_IDT=m
|
CONFIG_NTB_IDT=m
|
||||||
|
@ -495,8 +495,6 @@ Source5000: patch-5.%{base_sublevel}-git%{gitrev}.xz
|
|||||||
# Standalone patches
|
# Standalone patches
|
||||||
# 100 - Generic long running patches
|
# 100 - Generic long running patches
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Patch110: lib-cpumask-Make-CPUMASK_OFFSTACK-usable-without-deb.patch
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Patch111: input-kill-stupid-messages.patch
|
Patch111: input-kill-stupid-messages.patch
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Patch112: die-floppy-die.patch
|
Patch112: die-floppy-die.patch
|
||||||
|
@ -1,34 +0,0 @@
|
|||||||
From: Josh Boyer <jwboyer@fedoraproject.org>
|
|
||||||
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2013 08:39:16 -0500
|
|
||||||
Subject: [PATCH] lib/cpumask: Make CPUMASK_OFFSTACK usable without debug
|
|
||||||
dependency
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
When CPUMASK_OFFSTACK was added in 2008, it was dependent upon
|
|
||||||
DEBUG_PER_CPU_MAPS being enabled, or an architecture could select it.
|
|
||||||
The debug dependency adds additional overhead that isn't required for
|
|
||||||
operation of the feature, and we need CPUMASK_OFFSTACK to increase the
|
|
||||||
NR_CPUS value beyond 512 on x86. We drop the current dependency and make
|
|
||||||
sure SMP is set.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Bugzilla: N/A
|
|
||||||
Upstream-status: Nak'd, supposedly replacement coming to auto-select
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Signed-off-by: Josh Boyer <jwboyer@fedoraproject.org>
|
|
||||||
---
|
|
||||||
lib/Kconfig | 3 ++-
|
|
||||||
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
diff --git a/lib/Kconfig b/lib/Kconfig
|
|
||||||
index 3a2ef67db6c7..4af1e7e5a611 100644
|
|
||||||
--- a/lib/Kconfig
|
|
||||||
+++ b/lib/Kconfig
|
|
||||||
@@ -396,7 +396,8 @@ config CHECK_SIGNATURE
|
|
||||||
bool
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
config CPUMASK_OFFSTACK
|
|
||||||
- bool "Force CPU masks off stack" if DEBUG_PER_CPU_MAPS
|
|
||||||
+ bool "Force CPU masks off stack"
|
|
||||||
+ depends on SMP
|
|
||||||
help
|
|
||||||
Use dynamic allocation for cpumask_var_t, instead of putting
|
|
||||||
them on the stack. This is a bit more expensive, but avoids
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user