On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 09:27:20AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Wed, 29 Jun 2011, Mark Brown wrote: > > Rather than have each platform using sparse IRQs pick a suitably large > > NR_IRQS for use with sparse IRQs make the default high when they are > > enabled. We pick 64k as there is still a bitmap of IRQs that is > > allocated statically, and as we all know 64k should be enough for > > anyone. > The sparse bitmap is overallocated to NR_IRQS + 8k anyway, so that's > rather pointless. Hrm, OK. In that case why are platforms faffing around trying to size NR_IRQs in the first place? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
