From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>, Brian Gerst <brgerst@gmail.com>,
Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com>,
Shaohui Zheng <shaohui.zheng@intel.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] x86-64, NUMA: fix fakenuma boot failure
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 00:05:51 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110414150551.GC21397@mtj.dyndns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110414095059.080E.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com>
Hello,
On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 09:51:00AM +0900, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> hmm... My carbon copy is not corrupted. Maybe crappy intermediate
> server override it ?
Sorry about that. Problem was on my side.
The patch itself looks good to me now, so,
Acked-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
but I have some nitpicky comments and it would be nice if you can
respin the patch with the suggested updates.
> Currently, numa=fake boot parameter is broken. If it's used, kernel
> doesn't boot and makes panic by zero divide error.
"kernel may panic due to devide by zero error depending on CPU
configuration"
> The zero divede is caused following line. (ie group->cpu_power==0)
>
> update_sg_lb_stats()
Maybe it would be a good idea to prefix the above with filename, ie -
"kernel/sched_fail.c::update_sg_lb_stats()"
> This is regression since commit e23bba6044 (x86-64, NUMA: Unify
> emulated distance mapping). Because It drop fake_physnodes() and
> then cpu-node mapping was changed.
"This is a regression caused by blah blah because it changes cpu ->
node mapping in the process of dropping fake_physnodes()"
> old) all cpus are assinged node 0
> now) cpus are assigned round robin
> (the logic is implemented by numa_init_array())
It would be nice to note that the above happens only for CPUs which
lack explicit NUMA configuration information.
> Why round robin assignment doesn't work? Because init_numa_sched_groups_power()
> assume all logical cpus in the same physical cpu are assigned the same node.
^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^
assumes share
> (Then it only account group_first_cpu()). But the simple round robin
^^^^^^^ ^^^^^
accounts for probably ", and" would work better here
> broke the above assumption.
^^^^^
breaks
> Thus, this patch implement to reassigne node-id if buggy firmware or numa
> emulation makes wrong cpu node map.
It would be nice if you can detail the solution a bit more. What it's
doing, which configuration it affects and so on.
> + /*
> + * Our CPU scheduler assume all logical cpus in the same physical cpu
> + * package are assigned the same node. But, Buggy ACPI table or NUMA
> + * emulation might assign them to different node. Fix it.
> + */
Care to make the above a docbook comment?
Thank you.
--
tejun
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-04-14 15:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20110408235739.A6B0.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com>
2011-04-08 16:43 ` [PATCH] x86-64, NUMA: reimplement cpu node map initialization for fake numa Tejun Heo
2011-04-11 1:58 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-04-12 4:00 ` Tejun Heo
2011-04-12 4:38 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-04-12 6:31 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-04-12 7:13 ` Tejun Heo
2011-04-13 7:02 ` [PATCH] x86-64, NUMA: fix fakenuma boot failure KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-04-13 19:32 ` Tejun Heo
2011-04-14 0:51 ` [PATCH v2] " KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-04-14 15:05 ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2011-04-15 11:39 ` [PATCH v3] " KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-04-15 15:35 ` Tejun Heo
2011-04-15 19:24 ` [tip:x86/urgent] x86, NUMA: Fix " tip-bot for KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-04-14 6:44 ` [PATCH] x86-64, NUMA: fix " Ingo Molnar
2011-04-14 14:49 ` Tejun Heo
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20110414150551.GC21397@mtj.dyndns.org \
--to=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=brgerst@gmail.com \
--cc=gorcunov@gmail.com \
--cc=hpa@linux.intel.com \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=shaohui.zheng@intel.com \
--cc=yinghai@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.