Hi,
On 02/06/2022 09:49, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 01.06.2022 19:35, Julien Grall wrote:
On 31/05/2022 11:53, Daniel P. Smith wrote:
On 5/31/22 05:25, Julien Grall wrote:
Hi,
On 31/05/2022 03:41, Daniel P. Smith wrote:
diff --git a/xen/arch/Kconfig b/xen/arch/Kconfig
index f16eb0df43..57b14e22c9 100644
--- a/xen/arch/Kconfig
+++ b/xen/arch/Kconfig
@@ -17,3 +17,15 @@ config NR_CPUS
For CPU cores which support Simultaneous Multi-Threading or
similar
technologies, this the number of logical threads which Xen will
support.
+
+config NR_BOOTMODS
+ int "Maximum number of boot modules that a loader can pass"
+ range 1 64
OOI, any reason to limit the size?
I modelled this entirely after NR_CPUS, which applied a limit
The limit for NR_CPUS makes sense because there are scalability issues
after that (although 4095 seems quite high) and/or the HW impose a limit.
The 4095 is actually a software limit (due to how spinlocks are
implemented).
, and it
seemed reasonable to me at the time. I choose 64 since it was double
currently what Arm had set for MAX_MODULES. As such, I have no hard
reason for there to be a limit. It can easily be removed or adjusted to
whatever the reviewers feel would be appropriate.
Ok. In which case I would drop the limit beause it also prevent a users
to create more 64 dom0less domUs (actually a bit less because some
modules are used by Xen). I don't think there are a strong reason to
prevent that, right?
At least as per the kconfig language doc the upper bound is not
optional, so if a range is specified (which I think it should be,
to enforce the lower limit of 1) and upper bound is needed. To
address your concern with dom0less - 32768 maybe?
I am fine with that.
Cheers,
--
Julien Grall
