From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from psmtp.com (na3sys010amx202.postini.com [74.125.245.202]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 69F4C6B002B for ; Wed, 12 Dec 2012 23:50:03 -0500 (EST) Received: from /spool/local by e8.ny.us.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Wed, 12 Dec 2012 23:50:01 -0500 Received: from d01relay07.pok.ibm.com (d01relay07.pok.ibm.com [9.56.227.147]) by d01dlp02.pok.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5D6B6E803C for ; Wed, 12 Dec 2012 23:49:25 -0500 (EST) Received: from d01av01.pok.ibm.com (d01av01.pok.ibm.com [9.56.224.215]) by d01relay07.pok.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id qBD4nPII65732700 for ; Wed, 12 Dec 2012 23:49:25 -0500 Received: from d01av01.pok.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d01av01.pok.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id qBD4nPE8007445 for ; Wed, 12 Dec 2012 23:49:25 -0500 Message-ID: <50C95E4A.9010509@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2012 20:49:14 -0800 From: Dave Hansen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: add node physical memory range to sysfs References: <1354919696.2523.6.camel@buesod1.americas.hpqcorp.net> <20121207155125.d3117244.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <50C28720.3070205@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1355361524.5255.9.camel@buesod1.americas.hpqcorp.net> <50C933E9.2040707@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1355364222.9244.3.camel@buesod1.americas.hpqcorp.net> In-Reply-To: <1355364222.9244.3.camel@buesod1.americas.hpqcorp.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Davidlohr Bueso Cc: Andrew Morton , Greg Kroah-Hartman , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org On 12/12/2012 06:03 PM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote: > On Wed, 2012-12-12 at 17:48 -0800, Dave Hansen wrote: >> But if we went and did it per-DIMM (showing which physical addresses and >> NUMA nodes a DIMM maps to), wouldn't that be redundant with this >> proposed interface? > > If DIMMs overlap between nodes, then we wouldn't have an exact range for > a node in question. Having both approaches would complement each other. How is that possible? If NUMA nodes are defined by distances from CPUs to memory, how could a DIMM have more than a single distance to any given CPU? >> How do you plan to use this in practice, btw? > > It started because I needed to recognize the address of a node to remove > it from the e820 mappings and have the system "ignore" the node's > memory. Actually, now that I think about it, can you check in the /sys/devices/system/ directories for memory and nodes? We have linkages there for each memory section to every NUMA node, and you can also derive the physical address from the phys_index in each section. That should allow you to work out physical addresses for a given node. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org