From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net>
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2014 09:00:45 -0500
To: 9fans@9fans.net
Message-ID: <377f011e7a1ee2d06d0c80725a918a08@brasstown.quanstro.net>
In-Reply-To: <b1e6d4033de5ab04793ad89741c538cb@brasstown.quanstro.net>
References: <CAGNd-2NwZTh5BPJo+EX0=8kmwK8_r3YivftMbhpybfYGS9DYVw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGGHmKHP17NsSApo=d8TZRC1b8iLRo7LsJ3_efHFzaDu-4Wk2w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGNd-2N++nfx65sNWaRr9UfVoSrWLiU4=YTt_Ly3_0+pwJh-1w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAOw7k5iioR9WVVGg5fejTYoH98cpegE4NHcY8yWH1w3aqKuZrg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAOw7k5gxd0Bdp1Vd7TG_f_p7ShueCKhw_fZ-C+7qwxCDy=cw8g@mail.gmail.com>
	<b1e6d4033de5ab04793ad89741c538cb@brasstown.quanstro.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [9fans] Maximal number of processes
Topicbox-Message-UUID: b1f476de-ead8-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

> launching 32000 processes was not possible.  the kernel got stuck.

sloppy statement.  it's not clear if the kernel was really stuck or just
hit something exponential.

> here's one thing that's not immediately obvious, even when running the
> kernel.  conv.nmach must be less than 0x7fffffff/(1000*1000) = 2147
> to prevent reprioritize from doing silly things:
>
> 	/*
> 	 *  fairshare = 1.000 * conf.nproc * 1.000/load,
> 	 * except the decimal point is moved three places
> 	 * on both load and fairshare.
> 	 */
> 	fairshare = (conf.nmach*1000*1000)/load;

and, look.  the comment's wrong.  never read the comments!

- erik