From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S268203AbUH2RKU (ORCPT ); Sun, 29 Aug 2004 13:10:20 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S268212AbUH2RKU (ORCPT ); Sun, 29 Aug 2004 13:10:20 -0400 Received: from omx3-ext.sgi.com ([192.48.171.20]:5009 "EHLO omx3.sgi.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S268203AbUH2RIE (ORCPT ); Sun, 29 Aug 2004 13:08:04 -0400 From: Jesse Barnes To: James Bottomley Subject: Re: SMP Panic caused by [PATCH] sched: consolidate sched domains Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 10:07:50 -0700 User-Agent: KMail/1.6.2 Cc: Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds , Matthew Dobson , Nick Piggin , Linux Kernel References: <1093786747.1708.8.camel@mulgrave> <200408290948.06473.jbarnes@engr.sgi.com> <1093798704.10973.15.camel@mulgrave> In-Reply-To: <1093798704.10973.15.camel@mulgrave> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; boundary="Boundary-00=_m1gMBwx+1Cy8/WQ" Message-Id: <200408291007.50553.jbarnes@engr.sgi.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --Boundary-00=_m1gMBwx+1Cy8/WQ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline On Sunday, August 29, 2004 9:58 am, James Bottomley wrote: > On Sun, 2004-08-29 at 12:48, Jesse Barnes wrote: > > But I think this breaks what the code is supposed to do. You're right > > that we shouldn't use cpu_online_map, but we should leave the nodemask in > > there and fix the code that sets it in the non-NUMA case instead. > > Well, let's say it puts back the original behaviour. If you look at even > the NUMA code before these changes, it had cpu_possible_map in there. > > I totally agree about fixing NUMA, it looks completely broken to me in > the way it handles cpu maps because node_to_cpumask(i) needs to expand > to cpu_possible_map for initialisation and cpu_online_map for > operation. Has anyone ever checked NUMA for hotplug CPU? I've up and downed a few CPUs on an Altix, and it seems to work ok, but that's a pretty basic test. How about this? Jesse --Boundary-00=_m1gMBwx+1Cy8/WQ Content-Type: text/x-diff; charset="iso-8859-1"; name="node-to-cpumask-fix.patch" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="node-to-cpumask-fix.patch" ===== include/asm-generic/topology.h 1.6 vs edited ===== --- 1.6/include/asm-generic/topology.h 2004-02-03 21:35:17 -08:00 +++ edited/include/asm-generic/topology.h 2004-08-29 10:06:17 -07:00 @@ -36,13 +36,13 @@ #define parent_node(node) (0) #endif #ifndef node_to_cpumask -#define node_to_cpumask(node) (cpu_online_map) +#define node_to_cpumask(node) (cpu_possible_map) #endif #ifndef node_to_first_cpu #define node_to_first_cpu(node) (0) #endif #ifndef pcibus_to_cpumask -#define pcibus_to_cpumask(bus) (cpu_online_map) +#define pcibus_to_cpumask(bus) (cpu_possible_map) #endif /* Cross-node load balancing interval. */ --Boundary-00=_m1gMBwx+1Cy8/WQ--