From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from szxga04-in.huawei.com ([45.249.212.190]:2233 "EHLO huawei.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726501AbfIQJyE (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Sep 2019 05:54:04 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] numa: make node_to_cpumask_map() NUMA_NO_NODE aware References: <1568640481-133352-1-git-send-email-linyunsheng@huawei.com> <87pnjzsd8f.fsf@mpe.ellerman.id.au> <20190917093655.GA1872@dhcp22.suse.cz> From: Yunsheng Lin Message-ID: <07c78b6c-277e-eec0-a6cd-46beab1f1547@huawei.com> Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2019 17:53:57 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20190917093655.GA1872@dhcp22.suse.cz> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-s390-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Michal Hocko Cc: Michael Ellerman , catalin.marinas@arm.com, will@kernel.org, mingo@redhat.com, bp@alien8.de, rth@twiddle.net, ink@jurassic.park.msu.ru, mattst88@gmail.com, benh@kernel.crashing.org, paulus@samba.org, heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com, gor@linux.ibm.com, borntraeger@de.ibm.com, ysato@users.sourceforge.jp, dalias@libc.org, davem@davemloft.net, ralf@linux-mips.org, paul.burton@mips.com, jhogan@kernel.org, jiaxun.yang@flygoat.com, chenhc@lemote.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, rppt@linux.ibm.com, anshuman.khandual@arm.com, tglx@linutronix.de, cai@lca.pw, robin.murphy@arm.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, hpa@zytor.com, x86@kernel.org, dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, luto@kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org, len.brown@intel.com, axboe@kernel.dk, dledford@redhat.com, jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com, linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org, naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com, mwb@linux.vnet.ibm.com, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, tbogendoerfer@suse.de, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, rafael@kernel.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org On 2019/9/17 17:36, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Tue 17-09-19 14:20:11, Yunsheng Lin wrote: >> On 2019/9/17 13:28, Michael Ellerman wrote: >>> Yunsheng Lin writes: > [...] >>>> But we cannot really copy the page allocator logic. Simply because the >>>> page allocator doesn't enforce the near node affinity. It just picks it >>>> up as a preferred node but then it is free to fallback to any other numa >>>> node. This is not the case here and node_to_cpumask_map will only restrict >>>> to the particular node's cpus which would have really non deterministic >>>> behavior depending on where the code is executed. So in fact we really >>>> want to return cpu_online_mask for NUMA_NO_NODE. >>>> >>>> Some arches were already NUMA_NO_NODE aware, but they return cpu_all_mask, >>>> which should be identical with cpu_online_mask when those arches do not >>>> support cpu hotplug, this patch also changes them to return cpu_online_mask >>>> in order to be consistent and use NUMA_NO_NODE instead of "-1". >>> >>> Except some of those arches *do* support CPU hotplug, powerpc and sparc >>> at least. So switching from cpu_all_mask to cpu_online_mask is a >>> meaningful change. >> >> Yes, thanks for pointing out. >> >>> >>> That doesn't mean it's wrong, but you need to explain why it's the right >>> change. >> >> How about adding the below to the commit log: >> Even if some of the arches do support CPU hotplug, it does not make sense >> to return the cpu that has been hotplugged. >> >> Any suggestion? > > Again, for the third time, I believe. Make it a separate patch please. > There is absolutely no reason to conflate those two things. Ok, thanks. Will make the cpu_all_mask -> cpu_online_mask change a separate patch. Also, do you think it is better to resend this as individual patches for each arch or have all these changes in a single patch? I am not sure which is the common practice for a multi-arches changes like this. >