From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1751294AbbJCU0g (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Sat, 3 Oct 2015 16:26:36 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:42634 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1751123AbbJCU0f (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Sat, 3 Oct 2015 16:26:35 -0400
Message-ID: <561039F8.9000207@redhat.com>
Date: Sat, 03 Oct 2015 22:26:32 +0200
From: Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@redhat.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
CC: Daniel J Blueman <daniel@numascale.com>,
        Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@linux.intel.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>,
        x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] x86/apic: Use smaller array for __apicid_to_node[]
 mapping
References: <1443813145-29102-1-git-send-email-dvlasenk@redhat.com> <1443813145-29102-3-git-send-email-dvlasenk@redhat.com> <20151003074428.GA25143@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20151003074428.GA25143@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On 10/03/2015 09:44 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> * Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@redhat.com> wrote:
> 
>> @@ -56,16 +56,34 @@ early_param("numa", numa_setup);
>>  /*
>>   * apicid, cpu, node mappings
>>   */
>> -s16 __apicid_to_node[MAX_LOCAL_APICID] = {
>> -	[0 ... MAX_LOCAL_APICID-1] = NUMA_NO_NODE
>> +
>> +struct apicid_to_node __apicid_to_node[NR_CPUS] = {
>> +	[0 ... NR_CPUS-1] = {-1, NUMA_NO_NODE}
>>  };
>>  
>> +void set_apicid_to_node(int apicid, s16 node)
>> +{
>> +	static int ent;
> 
> having such statics inside functions is really obscure and makes review harder.
> I had to look twice to see it. Please move it outside and also name it 
> appropriately.

Just to confirm: you want it to be a static data, but not inside a function?


>> +	/* Protect against small kernel on large system */
>> +	if (ent >= NR_CPUS)
>> +		return;
>> +
>> +	__apicid_to_node[ent].apicid = apicid;
>> +	__apicid_to_node[ent].node = node;
>> +	ent++;
>> +}
> 
> So what happens if we run a small kernel and run out of entries? We just silently 
> seem to return, no warning, no nothing - the system will likely fail to boot in 
> myserious ways, right?

Good question.

I tested this.

I built a NR_CPUS=8 kernel and booted it on 144 cpu and 240 cpu machines.
Both booted fine:

[    0.000000] ACPI: Local APIC address 0xfee00000
[    0.000000] ACPI: NR_CPUS/possible_cpus limit of 8 reached.  Processor 8/0x16 ignored.
...
[    0.000000] ACPI: NR_CPUS/possible_cpus limit of 8 reached.  Processor 143/0xf7 ignored.