linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Li Zhong <zhong@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Michael Ellerman <michael@ellerman.id.au>,
	PowerPC email list <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH powerpc] Fix warning reported by verify_cpu_node_mapping()
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2014 08:45:29 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140821154529.GB10478@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1408608842.3003.20.camel@TP420>

On 21.08.2014 [16:14:02 +0800], Li Zhong wrote:
> With commit 2fabf084b, during boottime, cpu_numa_callback() is called
> earlier(before their online) for each cpu, and verify_cpu_node_mapping()
> uses cpu_to_node() to check whether siblings are in the same node. 
> 
> It skips the checking for siblings that are not online yet. So the only
> check done here is for the bootcpu, which is online at that time. But
> the per-cpu numa_node cpu_to_node() uses hasn't been set up yet (which
> will be set up in smp_prepare_cpus()).
> 
> So I could see something like following reported:
> [    0.000000] CPU thread siblings 1/2/3 and 0 don't belong to the same
> node!

You mean you did see this, right? (as opposed to "could" based upon code
inspection or something)

> 
> As we don't actually do the checking during this early stage, so maybe
> we could directly call numa_setup_cpu() in do_init_bootmem()?
> 
> Signed-off-by: Li Zhong <zhong@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

Acked-by: Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

> ---
>  arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c | 3 +--
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c b/arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c
> index d7737a5..9918c02 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c
> @@ -1128,8 +1128,7 @@ void __init do_init_bootmem(void)
>  	 * early in boot, cf. smp_prepare_cpus().
>  	 */
>  	for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
> -		cpu_numa_callback(&ppc64_numa_nb, CPU_UP_PREPARE,
> -				  (void *)(unsigned long)cpu);
> +		numa_setup_cpu((unsigned long)cpu);

This is a good change, thanks for catching it. I must have glossed over
those messages in my testing, my apologies!

-Nish

  reply	other threads:[~2014-08-21 15:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-08-21  8:14 [RFC PATCH powerpc] Fix warning reported by verify_cpu_node_mapping() Li Zhong
2014-08-21 15:45 ` Nishanth Aravamudan [this message]
2014-08-22  2:12   ` Li Zhong
2014-08-22 22:04     ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-08-25  6:01       ` Li Zhong
2014-08-25  7:22       ` [PATCH v2] powerpc: " Li Zhong
2014-08-26 13:10         ` Nathan Fontenot
2014-08-26 15:17           ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-08-27  1:41           ` Li Zhong
2014-08-27  9:10             ` Li Zhong

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=20140821154529.GB10478@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --to=nacc@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=michael@ellerman.id.au \
    --cc=paulus@samba.org \
    --cc=zhong@linux.vnet.ibm.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 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).