From: "\"Zhou, Wenjian/周文剑\"" <zhouwj-fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
To: Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
Cc: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, xlpang@redhat.com,
kexec@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
joe@perches.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, dyoung@redhat.com,
vgoyal@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 1/2] Documentation: kdump: remind user of nr_cpus
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 08:45:54 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <57BF9142.6060600@cn.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160824050645.GA8279@x1.redhat.com>
Hi Baoquan,
Sorry, I misunderstood it before.
Thanks for your detailed explanation.
Hi Jon and Baoquan, I'm confused about how to adjust the kdump.txt.
Does the patch set v9 still OK?
--
Thanks
Zhou
On 08/24/2016 01:06 PM, Baoquan He wrote:
> On 08/22/16 at 09:14am, "Zhou, Wenjian/周文剑" wrote:
>> On 08/19/2016 11:57 PM, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
>>> On Fri, 19 Aug 2016 08:33:21 +0800
>>> "Zhou, Wenjian/周文剑" <zhouwj-fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I was also confused by maxcpus and nr_cpus before writing this patch.
>>>> I think it is a good choice to describe it in kernel-parameters.txt.
>>>>
>>>> Then, only two things need to be done I think.
>>>> One is move the above description to maxcpus= in kernel-parameters.txt.
>>>> And the other is replace maxcpus with maxcpus/nr_cpus in kdump.txt.
>>>>
>>>> How do you think?
>>>
>>> That is not quite what I had in mind, sorry. What I would really like to
>>> see in kernel-parameters.txt is an explanation of how those two parameters
>>> differ - what do they do differently and how should a user choose one over
>>> the other? What we have now offers no guidance in that matter.
>>>
>>
>> I thought about it. I think user may not need this.
>> What user really want to know is how to choose.
>> And it is also not a hard work. If nr_cpus is not supported by the ARCH, use maxcpus.
>> Otherwise, nr_cpus. The reason why maxcpus still exists is nr_cpus can't be supported
>> by some ARCHes.
>
> I think Jon is suggesting that a note can be added into
> kernel-parameter.txt to tell what's the difference between nr_cpus and
> max_cpus. I checked code and discussed within our kdump team, max_cpus
> is used to limit how many 'present' cpus are allowed to be brought up
> during system bootup, while nr_cpus is used to set the upper limit of
> 'possible' cpus. E.g on my laptop, there are 4 cpus while 4 hotplug
> cpus, altogether 8 possible cpus. Possible cpus slot is for cpu hot
> plug, means during bootup you want to bring up 4 present cpus, but
> later you could physically hot plug 4 others. Because of attribute of
> some static percpu variables, we need pre-allocate memory for all
> possible cpus though some of them may not be really used if no extra
> cpu physically hot plugged after system bootup.
>
> Hence for kdump kernel, people never want to do a cpu hot plug in there.
> That's why we want to use nr_cpus to limit the number of possible cpu to
> save memory. E.g still on my laptop, if I want to do a kdump, the number
> of possible cpu is still 8, but you may want to use only 1 cpu to dump,
> maybe 2 or 3 for parallel dumping. But you absolutely don't want to set
> nr_cpus=8 in your kdump kernel cmdline, though it doesn't cause failure,
> memory is wasted because of percpu pre-allocation. So specifying nr_cpus=1
> is much better. While with specifying max_cpus=1, the number of possible
> cpu is still 8. That's the reason. On x86_64 and s390, there's another
> kernel para "possible_cpus=xx" which can be used to set possible cpus for
> cpu hot plug. Only when "possible_cpus=0" is specified, smp is disabled.
> I am not very sure why this is introduced, number of possible cpu is
> decided by the min value of nr_cpus= and possible_cpus=.
>
> nr_cpus and maxcpus might not be very clear to people which are
> described in Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt.
>
> Hi Jon, do you think change as below is OK to you?
>
>
> From 8b940193a29acf0857d4975d77f4b9f48e2d6cb8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>
> Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 11:14:34 +0800
> Subject: [PATCH] docs: kernel-parameter : Improve the description of nr_cpus
> and maxcpus
>
> From the old description people still can't get what's the exact
> difference between nr_cpus and maxcpus. Especially in kdump kernel
> nr_cpus is always suggested if it's implemented in the ARCH. The
> reason is nr_cpus is used to limit the max number of possible cpu
> in system, the sum of already plugged cpus and hot plug cpus can't
> exceed its value. However maxcpus is used to limit how many cpus
> are allowed to be brought up during bootup.
>
> Signed-off-by: Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>
> ---
> Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt | 20 +++++++++++++-------
> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt b/Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt
> index 46c030a..25d3b36 100644
> --- a/Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt
> @@ -2161,10 +2161,13 @@ bytes respectively. Such letter suffixes can also be entirely omitted.
> than or equal to this physical address is ignored.
>
> maxcpus= [SMP] Maximum number of processors that an SMP kernel
> - should make use of. maxcpus=n : n >= 0 limits the
> - kernel to using 'n' processors. n=0 is a special case,
> - it is equivalent to "nosmp", which also disables
> - the IO APIC.
> + will bring up during bootup. maxcpus=n : n >= 0 limits
> + the kernel to bring up 'n' processors. Surely after
> + bootup you can bring up the other plugged cpu by executing
> + "echo 1 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpuX/online". So maxcpus
> + only takes effect during system bootup.
> + While n=0 is a special case, it is equivalent to "nosmp",
> + which also disables the IO APIC.
>
> max_loop= [LOOP] The number of loop block devices that get
> (loop.max_loop) unconditionally pre-created at init time. The default
> @@ -2773,9 +2776,12 @@ bytes respectively. Such letter suffixes can also be entirely omitted.
>
> nr_cpus= [SMP] Maximum number of processors that an SMP kernel
> could support. nr_cpus=n : n >= 1 limits the kernel to
> - supporting 'n' processors. Later in runtime you can not
> - use hotplug cpu feature to put more cpu back to online.
> - just like you compile the kernel NR_CPUS=n
> + support 'n' processors. It could be larger than the
> + number of already plugged CPU during bootup, later in
> + runtime you can physically add extra cpu until it reaches
> + n. So during boot up some boot time memory for per-cpu
> + variables need be pre-allocated for later physical cpu
> + hot plugging.
>
> nr_uarts= [SERIAL] maximum number of UARTs to be registered.
>
>
_______________________________________________
kexec mailing list
kexec@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "\"Zhou, Wenjian/周文剑\"" <zhouwj-fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
To: Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
Cc: <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
<dyoung@redhat.com>, <vgoyal@redhat.com>,
<kexec@lists.infradead.org>, <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
<xlpang@redhat.com>, <joe@perches.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 1/2] Documentation: kdump: remind user of nr_cpus
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 08:45:54 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <57BF9142.6060600@cn.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160824050645.GA8279@x1.redhat.com>
Hi Baoquan,
Sorry, I misunderstood it before.
Thanks for your detailed explanation.
Hi Jon and Baoquan, I'm confused about how to adjust the kdump.txt.
Does the patch set v9 still OK?
--
Thanks
Zhou
On 08/24/2016 01:06 PM, Baoquan He wrote:
> On 08/22/16 at 09:14am, "Zhou, Wenjian/周文剑" wrote:
>> On 08/19/2016 11:57 PM, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
>>> On Fri, 19 Aug 2016 08:33:21 +0800
>>> "Zhou, Wenjian/周文剑" <zhouwj-fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I was also confused by maxcpus and nr_cpus before writing this patch.
>>>> I think it is a good choice to describe it in kernel-parameters.txt.
>>>>
>>>> Then, only two things need to be done I think.
>>>> One is move the above description to maxcpus= in kernel-parameters.txt.
>>>> And the other is replace maxcpus with maxcpus/nr_cpus in kdump.txt.
>>>>
>>>> How do you think?
>>>
>>> That is not quite what I had in mind, sorry. What I would really like to
>>> see in kernel-parameters.txt is an explanation of how those two parameters
>>> differ - what do they do differently and how should a user choose one over
>>> the other? What we have now offers no guidance in that matter.
>>>
>>
>> I thought about it. I think user may not need this.
>> What user really want to know is how to choose.
>> And it is also not a hard work. If nr_cpus is not supported by the ARCH, use maxcpus.
>> Otherwise, nr_cpus. The reason why maxcpus still exists is nr_cpus can't be supported
>> by some ARCHes.
>
> I think Jon is suggesting that a note can be added into
> kernel-parameter.txt to tell what's the difference between nr_cpus and
> max_cpus. I checked code and discussed within our kdump team, max_cpus
> is used to limit how many 'present' cpus are allowed to be brought up
> during system bootup, while nr_cpus is used to set the upper limit of
> 'possible' cpus. E.g on my laptop, there are 4 cpus while 4 hotplug
> cpus, altogether 8 possible cpus. Possible cpus slot is for cpu hot
> plug, means during bootup you want to bring up 4 present cpus, but
> later you could physically hot plug 4 others. Because of attribute of
> some static percpu variables, we need pre-allocate memory for all
> possible cpus though some of them may not be really used if no extra
> cpu physically hot plugged after system bootup.
>
> Hence for kdump kernel, people never want to do a cpu hot plug in there.
> That's why we want to use nr_cpus to limit the number of possible cpu to
> save memory. E.g still on my laptop, if I want to do a kdump, the number
> of possible cpu is still 8, but you may want to use only 1 cpu to dump,
> maybe 2 or 3 for parallel dumping. But you absolutely don't want to set
> nr_cpus=8 in your kdump kernel cmdline, though it doesn't cause failure,
> memory is wasted because of percpu pre-allocation. So specifying nr_cpus=1
> is much better. While with specifying max_cpus=1, the number of possible
> cpu is still 8. That's the reason. On x86_64 and s390, there's another
> kernel para "possible_cpus=xx" which can be used to set possible cpus for
> cpu hot plug. Only when "possible_cpus=0" is specified, smp is disabled.
> I am not very sure why this is introduced, number of possible cpu is
> decided by the min value of nr_cpus= and possible_cpus=.
>
> nr_cpus and maxcpus might not be very clear to people which are
> described in Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt.
>
> Hi Jon, do you think change as below is OK to you?
>
>
> From 8b940193a29acf0857d4975d77f4b9f48e2d6cb8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>
> Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 11:14:34 +0800
> Subject: [PATCH] docs: kernel-parameter : Improve the description of nr_cpus
> and maxcpus
>
> From the old description people still can't get what's the exact
> difference between nr_cpus and maxcpus. Especially in kdump kernel
> nr_cpus is always suggested if it's implemented in the ARCH. The
> reason is nr_cpus is used to limit the max number of possible cpu
> in system, the sum of already plugged cpus and hot plug cpus can't
> exceed its value. However maxcpus is used to limit how many cpus
> are allowed to be brought up during bootup.
>
> Signed-off-by: Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>
> ---
> Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt | 20 +++++++++++++-------
> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt b/Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt
> index 46c030a..25d3b36 100644
> --- a/Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt
> @@ -2161,10 +2161,13 @@ bytes respectively. Such letter suffixes can also be entirely omitted.
> than or equal to this physical address is ignored.
>
> maxcpus= [SMP] Maximum number of processors that an SMP kernel
> - should make use of. maxcpus=n : n >= 0 limits the
> - kernel to using 'n' processors. n=0 is a special case,
> - it is equivalent to "nosmp", which also disables
> - the IO APIC.
> + will bring up during bootup. maxcpus=n : n >= 0 limits
> + the kernel to bring up 'n' processors. Surely after
> + bootup you can bring up the other plugged cpu by executing
> + "echo 1 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpuX/online". So maxcpus
> + only takes effect during system bootup.
> + While n=0 is a special case, it is equivalent to "nosmp",
> + which also disables the IO APIC.
>
> max_loop= [LOOP] The number of loop block devices that get
> (loop.max_loop) unconditionally pre-created at init time. The default
> @@ -2773,9 +2776,12 @@ bytes respectively. Such letter suffixes can also be entirely omitted.
>
> nr_cpus= [SMP] Maximum number of processors that an SMP kernel
> could support. nr_cpus=n : n >= 1 limits the kernel to
> - supporting 'n' processors. Later in runtime you can not
> - use hotplug cpu feature to put more cpu back to online.
> - just like you compile the kernel NR_CPUS=n
> + support 'n' processors. It could be larger than the
> + number of already plugged CPU during bootup, later in
> + runtime you can physically add extra cpu until it reaches
> + n. So during boot up some boot time memory for per-cpu
> + variables need be pre-allocated for later physical cpu
> + hot plugging.
>
> nr_uarts= [SERIAL] maximum number of UARTs to be registered.
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-08-26 0:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-08-18 3:11 [PATCH v9 0/2] update the doc of kdump Zhou Wenjian
2016-08-18 3:11 ` Zhou Wenjian
2016-08-18 3:11 ` [PATCH v9 1/2] Documentation: kdump: remind user of nr_cpus Zhou Wenjian
2016-08-18 3:11 ` Zhou Wenjian
2016-08-18 17:18 ` Jonathan Corbet
2016-08-18 17:18 ` Jonathan Corbet
2016-08-19 0:33 ` "Zhou, Wenjian/周文剑"
2016-08-19 0:33 ` "Zhou, Wenjian/周文剑"
2016-08-19 15:57 ` Jonathan Corbet
2016-08-19 15:57 ` Jonathan Corbet
2016-08-22 1:14 ` "Zhou, Wenjian/周文剑"
2016-08-22 1:14 ` "Zhou, Wenjian/周文剑"
2016-08-24 5:06 ` Baoquan He
2016-08-24 5:06 ` Baoquan He
2016-08-25 19:10 ` Jonathan Corbet
2016-08-25 19:10 ` Jonathan Corbet
2016-08-27 0:35 ` Baoquan He
2016-08-27 0:35 ` Baoquan He
2016-08-26 0:45 ` "Zhou, Wenjian/周文剑" [this message]
2016-08-26 0:45 ` "Zhou, Wenjian/周文剑"
2016-08-27 0:38 ` Baoquan He
2016-08-27 0:38 ` Baoquan He
2016-08-18 3:11 ` [PATCH v9 2/2] Documentation: kdump: add description of enable multi-cpus support Zhou Wenjian
2016-08-18 3:11 ` Zhou Wenjian
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=57BF9142.6060600@cn.fujitsu.com \
--to=zhouwj-fnst@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bhe@redhat.com \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=dyoung@redhat.com \
--cc=joe@perches.com \
--cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=vgoyal@redhat.com \
--cc=xlpang@redhat.com \
/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.