Time to increase MAX_TASKS?

[John Baldwin]

On Tuesday, August 07, 2012 07:31:09 PM Sean Bruno wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-08-07 at 14:30 -0700, John Baldwin wrote:
> > On Tuesday, August 07, 2012 2:43:17 pm Sean Bruno wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 09:13 -0700, Sean Bruno wrote:
> > > > On Mon, 2012-07-30 at 05:07 -0700, John Baldwin wrote:
> > > > > > I am currently running with a value of 128 and doing a bit of
> > > > > 
> > > > > testing.
> > > > > 
> > > > > I think it should be something like MAX(32, MAXCPU).
> > > > 
> > > > Ah, that sounds WAY more reasonable.  I shall test thusly.
> > > > 
> > > > Sean
> > > 
> > > This did *not* work on a dual socket machine with MAXCPU at 64.
> > 
> > Hmm, can you find out how many tasks it wanted?  I know part of
> > it is a function of the number of CPUs (we queue a task for each
> > CPU at one point before tasks are running).
> 
> I extended the log message in acpi_task enqueue() with the current task
> count, max task setting and max thread setting when the error occurs.
> It appears that we are definitely going above max tasks from my review:
> 
> AcpiOsExecute: failed to enqueue task, consider increasing the
> debug.acpi.max_tasks tunable acpi_task_count(64), acpi_max_tasks(64)
> max_threads(3)

I meant that with the limit jacked up to something that silences the warning
(such as 128), what is the max number of tasks queued?

-- 
John Baldwin