Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [xen-unstable test] 8803: regressions - FAIL

[Laszlo Ersek <lersek@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 09/01/11 18:35, Ian Campbell wrote:

> diff -r bb97bd46df6c -r 4309ff953500 xen/include/asm-x86/config.h
> --- a/xen/include/asm-x86/config.h      Thu Sep 01 16:03:21 2011 +0100
> +++ b/xen/include/asm-x86/config.h      Thu Sep 01 17:34:41 2011 +0100
> @@ -49,6 +49,8 @@
>
>   #ifdef MAX_PHYS_CPUS
>   #define NR_CPUS MAX_PHYS_CPUS
> +#elif defined __i386__
> +#define NR_CPUS 128
>   #else
>   #define NR_CPUS 256
>   #endif
Ah, sorry. This special-casing / after-the-fact #error for 32-bit is 
actually there in the RHEL-5 fork, and there I bumped only the x86_64 
default (the 32-bit one is set to 32). When I looked at the upstream 
source, I noticed only a single case (set to 128), and I figured 
upstream either makes the 32/64 distinction by different means, or they 
support 128 PCPUs on 32-bit too, and 128 being >> than 32, I thought 256 
should be fine as well.
I was wrong, sorry for wasting your time.

lacos

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel