Re: too low MAX_MP_BUSSES

From: Andrew Morton
Date: Tue Aug 01 2006 - 04:36:20 EST


On Mon, 31 Jul 2006 13:55:45 +0200
Vitezslav Samel <samel@xxxxxxx> wrote:

> Hi!
>
> I tried upgrading our server (i386 arch) from 2.6.16 to 2.6.17 but there
> were some odd messages in dmesg:
>
> MP table busid value (32) for bustype ISA is too large, max. supported is 31
>
> and (repeated 315 times):
>
> unknown bus type 32
>
> I found out that 50% of the processor time was spent in softirq and the timers
> ran too fast. I didn't look for what else was wrong.
>
> Tracked down to this change in 2.6.17-rc2:
>
> diff -urN linux-2.6.17-rc1/arch/i386/kernel/mpparse.c linux-2.6.17-rc2/arch/i386/kernel/mpparse.c
> + if (m->mpc_busid >= MAX_MP_BUSSES) {
> + printk(KERN_WARNING "MP table busid value (%d) for bustype %s "
> + " is too large, max. supported is %d\n",
> + m->mpc_busid, str, MAX_MP_BUSSES - 1);
> + return;
> + }
>
> Uping the MAX_MP_BUSSES value in include/asm-i386/mach-default/mach_mpspec.h
> to 64 makes the machine work O.K.
> The system is HP DL380 g4 with 1 Xeon CPU, kernel compiled non-SMP.
>
> Here is excerpt from mptable output:
> ---
> Bus: Bus ID Type
> 0 PCI
> 1 PCI
> 2 PCI
> 3 PCI
> 4 PCI
> 5 PCI
> 6 PCI
> 10 PCI
> 32 ISA
> ---
> The last item is the offending one.
>
> Please, can you consider up the default value of MAX_MP_BUSSES?
>
> P.S.: also tested 2.6.18-rc3, the same - bad - result
>

mach-default uses 32 and mach-generic uses 260, so I doubt if there's a big
downside to increasing mach-default. I expect distros ship with
mach-generic, so you're a rare case.

<tries to remember who works on this and fails>

Andi? Can you see any problems with increasing the mach-default setting?

Thanks.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/