linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com (Lorenzo Pieralisi)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: aarch64 ACPI boot regressed by commit 7ba5f605f3a0 ("arm64/numa: remove the limitation that cpu0 must bind to node0")
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2016 17:58:35 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161014165835.GA24546@red-moon> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c8b9f6fc-3a4b-f74a-c930-f500bcc00a1d@redhat.com>

On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 06:22:55PM +0200, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
> On 10/14/16 17:42, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 05:27:58PM +0200, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
> >> On 10/14/16 17:01, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
> >>
> >>> Maybe the code I
> >>> tried to analyze in this email was never *meant* to associate CPU#0 with
> >>> any NUMA node at all (not even node 0); instead, other code -- for
> >>> example code removed by 7ba5f605f3a0 -- was meant to perform that
> >>> association.
> >>
> >> Staring a bit more at the code, this looks very likely; in acpi_map_gic_cpu_interface() we have
> >>
> >>> 	/* Check if GICC structure of boot CPU is available in the MADT */
> >>> 	if (cpu_logical_map(0) == hwid) {
> >>> 		if (bootcpu_valid) {
> >>> 			pr_err("duplicate boot CPU MPIDR: 0x%llx in MADT\n",
> >>> 			       hwid);
> >>> 			return;
> >>> 		}
> >>> 		bootcpu_valid = true;
> >>> 		return;
> >>> 	}
> >>
> >> which means that this callback function (for parsing the GICC
> >> structures in the MADT) expects to find the boot processor as well.
> >>
> >> Upon finding the boot processor, we set bootcpu_valid to true, and
> >> that's it -- no association with any NUMA node, and no incrementing of
> >> "cpu_count".
> > 
> > Yes, because that's to check the MADT contains the boot cpu hwid.
> > 
> > Does this help (compile tested only) ?
> > 
> > -- >8 -- 
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c
> > index d3f151c..8507703 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c
> > @@ -544,6 +544,7 @@ static int __init smp_cpu_setup(int cpu)
> >  			return;
> >  		}
> >  		bootcpu_valid = true;
> > +		early_map_cpu_to_node(0, acpi_numa_get_nid(0, hwid));
> >  		return;
> >  	}
> >  
> > 
> 
> Your patch applies to the tree at v4.8-14604-g29fbff8698fc, but the function the hunk modifies is not smp_cpu_setup(), it is acpi_map_gic_cpu_interface():
> 
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c
> > index d3f151cfd4a1..8507703dabe4 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c
> > @@ -544,6 +544,7 @@ acpi_map_gic_cpu_interface(struct acpi_madt_generic_interrupt *processor)
> >  			return;
> >  		}
> >  		bootcpu_valid = true;
> > +		early_map_cpu_to_node(0, acpi_numa_get_nid(0, hwid));
> >  		return;
> >  	}
> > 
> 
> Anyway, your patch works with both the two-node NUMA configuration
> Drew suggested for testing, and with the single-node config that I
> originally used for the bisection. Therefore:
> 
> Tested-by: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>
> Reported-by: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>
> 
> Thank you very much for the quick bugfix! And, I think your patch
> (when you send it for real) should carry
> 
> Fixes: 7ba5f605f3a0d9495aad539eeb8346d726dfc183
> 
> too, because it supplies the cpu#0<->node#xxx association that
> 7ba5f605f3a0 removed not just for DT, but also for ACPI.

Sure, will do, I will send it out on Monday.

Cheers,
Lorenzo

  reply	other threads:[~2016-10-14 16:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-10-13 22:50 aarch64 ACPI boot regressed by commit 7ba5f605f3a0 ("arm64/numa: remove the limitation that cpu0 must bind to node0") Laszlo Ersek
2016-10-14  8:05 ` Andrew Jones
2016-10-14 13:18   ` Laszlo Ersek
2016-10-14 13:44     ` Andrew Jones
2016-10-14 15:45       ` Laszlo Ersek
2016-10-14 15:01     ` Laszlo Ersek
2016-10-14 15:27       ` Laszlo Ersek
2016-10-14 15:42         ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2016-10-14 16:22           ` Laszlo Ersek
2016-10-14 16:58             ` Lorenzo Pieralisi [this message]
2016-10-17  8:04             ` Leizhen (ThunderTown)

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=20161014165835.GA24546@red-moon \
    --to=lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).