From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EEFBEC47258 for ; Wed, 17 Jan 2024 19:59:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 29C456B0085; Wed, 17 Jan 2024 14:59:57 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 1FD756B0087; Wed, 17 Jan 2024 14:59:57 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 09EB96B0089; Wed, 17 Jan 2024 14:59:57 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0015.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.15]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAFBF6B0085 for ; Wed, 17 Jan 2024 14:59:56 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin21.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay09.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0F0280C6E for ; Wed, 17 Jan 2024 19:59:56 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 81689868792.21.4DFAF4F Received: from gentwo.org (gentwo.org [62.72.0.81]) by imf16.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7CC9180007 for ; Wed, 17 Jan 2024 19:59:54 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf16.hostedemail.com; dkim=none; dmarc=fail reason="No valid SPF, No valid DKIM" header.from=linux.com (policy=none); spf=softfail (imf16.hostedemail.com: 62.72.0.81 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of cl@linux.com) smtp.mailfrom=cl@linux.com ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1705521595; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=COqnYiI1YAA/1zFmAU2jaAcYfOtFl0AciS/9ZE4Y8SE=; b=PTyUSOiCtW0XZa26miX+q37Hd4JrqaKttvcwt/lGyCPGEjEofHUBytn+4eCWTioDpaymeQ hJIY4aH9qjrptM0UKFhgL+oaG8MB0IItwBxKI8DrmgXu9g3rqrpuZZyZqaDchXBQ6pGGO6 NlHTjlkbUguqcRN5a4K43hLvgOP9r3U= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf16.hostedemail.com; dkim=none; dmarc=fail reason="No valid SPF, No valid DKIM" header.from=linux.com (policy=none); spf=softfail (imf16.hostedemail.com: 62.72.0.81 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of cl@linux.com) smtp.mailfrom=cl@linux.com ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1705521595; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=i+4be9tPveWusGDqgt7Tij4Xwkex274qwaqmOVGw31QIu33ff5U29WGT7CGrFuxnfuyF/T PBmlR4JgxBerJ4jwUm5HGs4LUIZ37R2b9kOkG2P0aNtxFJKxTP1cDFk12Nhtd5ZIPwIIls jwY0RpX7VBVWJabdqBhRUxQWDM61AbE= Received: by gentwo.org (Postfix, from userid 1003) id 5A05640A8B; Wed, 17 Jan 2024 11:59:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gentwo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 596B040A85; Wed, 17 Jan 2024 11:59:53 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2024 11:59:53 -0800 (PST) From: "Christoph Lameter (Ampere)" To: Eric Mackay cc: mark.rutland@arm.com, Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com, Matteo.Carlini@arm.com, Valentin.Schneider@arm.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, anshuman.khandual@arm.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com, dave.kleikamp@oracle.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux@armlinux.org.uk, robin.murphy@arm.com, vanshikonda@os.amperecomputing.com, yang@os.amperecomputing.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM64: Dynamically allocate cpumasks and increase supported CPUs to 512 In-Reply-To: <20240116210633.116278-1-eric.mackay@oracle.com> Message-ID: <47461daf-3aa5-493f-7278-b0116ee2c724@linux.com> References: <20240116210633.116278-1-eric.mackay@oracle.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Rspam-User: X-Rspamd-Server: rspam12 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: D7CC9180007 X-Stat-Signature: wjwk8yd3so86uawyeku3jh7z7z5mk6yu X-HE-Tag: 1705521594-727096 X-HE-Meta: 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 nNuwB91a ByYiIyjp5eRqeUtyIs/WFqEsV9O5aObZ99JKDt4qKpn5T0ZLPD1enjUAZx7hza6TGXGCJ/e8M5Z9CVD2/USZwm6mlYQr/RfZLwreX5JhufQsI1a6u7b/yqUbSflmA0dQCYHRRP8KkAHmUFl4= X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000004, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On Tue, 16 Jan 2024, Eric Mackay wrote: > > It seems > 256 was chosen as the cutoff simply because it preserves existing behavior. > The patch description seems to imply there was pushback from distro maintainers on just increasing > the default NR_CPUS. Yup that was it.