From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Leizhen (ThunderTown)" Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] mm: only dispaly online cpus of the numa node Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2017 14:06:56 +0800 Message-ID: <59DB1200.40106@huawei.com> References: <1506678805-15392-1-git-send-email-thunder.leizhen@huawei.com> <1506678805-15392-2-git-send-email-thunder.leizhen@huawei.com> <20171002103806.GB3823@arm.com> <20171002145446.eade11c1f28d55e5f67aa4d0@linux-foundation.org> <20171003134726.GC26552@arm.com> <20171003135628.xqhvr3rg7s5aymeq@dhcp22.suse.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20171003135628.xqhvr3rg7s5aymeq@dhcp22.suse.cz> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Michal Hocko , Will Deacon Cc: Andrew Morton , Catalin Marinas , linux-kernel , linux-api , Greg Kroah-Hartman , linux-mm , Tianhong Ding , Hanjun Guo , Libin , Kefeng Wang List-Id: linux-api@vger.kernel.org On 2017/10/3 21:56, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Tue 03-10-17 14:47:26, Will Deacon wrote: >> On Mon, Oct 02, 2017 at 02:54:46PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: >>> On Mon, 2 Oct 2017 11:38:07 +0100 Will Deacon wrote: >>> >>>>> When I executed numactl -H(which read /sys/devices/system/node/nodeX/cpumap >>>>> and display cpumask_of_node for each node), but I got different result on >>>>> X86 and arm64. For each numa node, the former only displayed online CPUs, >>>>> and the latter displayed all possible CPUs. Unfortunately, both Linux >>>>> documentation and numactl manual have not described it clear. >>>>> >>>>> I sent a mail to ask for help, and Michal Hocko replied >>>>> that he preferred to print online cpus because it doesn't really make much >>>>> sense to bind anything on offline nodes. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Zhen Lei >>>>> Acked-by: Michal Hocko >>>>> --- >>>>> drivers/base/node.c | 12 ++++++++++-- >>>>> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> Which tree is this intended to go through? I'm happy to take it via arm64, >>>> but I don't want to tread on anybody's toes in linux-next and it looks like >>>> there are already queued changes to this file via Andrew's tree. >>> >>> I grabbed it. I suppose there's some small risk of userspace breakage >>> so I suggest it be a 4.15-rc1 thing? >> >> To be honest, I suspect the vast majority (if not all) code that reads this >> file was developed for x86, so having the same behaviour for arm64 sounds >> like something we should do ASAP before people try to special case with >> things like #ifdef __aarch64__. >> >> I'd rather have this in 4.14 if possible. > > Agreed! > +1 -- Thanks! BestRegards