Tejun Heo wrote: > Jiri Kosina wrote: >> So how about something along the lines below? (completely untested as >> well) >> >> From: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@xxxxxxx> >> Subject: sched: move rq_weight data array out of .percpu >> >> Commit 34d76c41 introduced percpu array update_shares_data, size of which >> being proportional to NR_CPUS. Unfortunately this blows up ia64 for large >> NR_CPUS configuration, as ia64 allows only 64k for .percpu section. >> >> Fix this by allocating this array dynamically and keep only pointer to it >> percpu. > > Looks good to me from percpu POV. Oh... one thing. If you're doing dynamic allocation you can use nr_cpu_ids instead of NR_CPUS. -- tejun -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html