> > > > MAX_LOCAL_APIC was definitely an arbitrary choice here and has very little > relevance. scnlistprintf will protect against overflow, but we still need > to decide upon a constant that will emit the most information possible > while not overly polluting the printk and saving on bss, as you mentioned. > I suspect we could agree on a value as little as 128 and it would work for > the overwhelming majority (all?) of users. For now at least seems reasonable to limit to 128 or so yes (and go back to the stack). if we ever have sparse apic ids for nodes then that might change; but in this case could still just do a acpidump or teach the printer to be more clever and support strides. It would be just good to have some indication in the output if there was a overflow. -Andi -- ak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx -- Speaking for myself only. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
