From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [112.213.38.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 799ECC433EF for ; Fri, 24 Jun 2022 08:40:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from boromir.ozlabs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4LTrDk5VG2z3cgP for ; Fri, 24 Jun 2022 18:40:54 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=ibm.com header.i=@ibm.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=pp1 header.b=meV/HI47; dkim-atps=neutral Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=none (no SPF record) smtp.mailfrom=linux.vnet.ibm.com (client-ip=148.163.156.1; helo=mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com; envelope-from=srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=ibm.com header.i=@ibm.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=pp1 header.b=meV/HI47; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.156.1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4LTrCy2yj9z3blV for ; Fri, 24 Jun 2022 18:40:13 +1000 (AEST) Received: from pps.filterd (m0187473.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.17.1.5/8.17.1.5) with ESMTP id 25O7aYmJ007105; Fri, 24 Jun 2022 08:40:06 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=date : from : to : cc : subject : message-id : reply-to : references : mime-version : content-type : in-reply-to; s=pp1; bh=34yAiJzih1DSpC/+JB3ayNblGkWCzxnzcG3hFnIpUiw=; b=meV/HI47lnZS7nIBJ0dQHb9Fq0TYFPY5qGRdAsOUv0ZKtYh9iVk1j9PR2JOkeZwHPYOq Lk15DAKrBwBPZCN655p9uRZZ9MbILbpZlNBOlI6/CSvjrxtefLu7p4tSTU/agovd3c6R UVfiek70q8AekPqCwwSHlg6SB1fneS7mRio8XjIHCxpZoZNGraYtxi4FWDnLIJC+KFvX c4k/ZHvMkI0TIKgTdSHNzJvsh7T84UmSkJ7G112KTtliHvnee0yDrEHbfhHRPQcxOzf3 9f3BYBqvIGxWNN6Z41EQ+cgR0MOw+IV6XTvpeQdjqdlAPz3F/Scq9H0iUKRUlIpAb8Ps xA== Received: from ppma04ams.nl.ibm.com (63.31.33a9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.51.49.99]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3gw8nuswxs-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 24 Jun 2022 08:40:06 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma04ams.nl.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma04ams.nl.ibm.com (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with SMTP id 25O8M5YL026666; Fri, 24 Jun 2022 08:40:04 GMT Received: from b06cxnps3074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06relay09.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.109.194]) by ppma04ams.nl.ibm.com with ESMTP id 3gs6b98p2f-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 24 Jun 2022 08:40:03 +0000 Received: from d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.58]) by b06cxnps3074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 25O8e1R815729078 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 24 Jun 2022 08:40:01 GMT Received: from d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id A05894C040; Fri, 24 Jun 2022 08:40:01 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D2124C046; Fri, 24 Jun 2022 08:40:00 +0000 (GMT) Received: from linux.vnet.ibm.com (unknown [9.126.150.29]) by d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with SMTP; Fri, 24 Jun 2022 08:40:00 +0000 (GMT) Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2022 14:09:59 +0530 From: Srikar Dronamraju To: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] powerpc/numa: Return the first online node instead of 0 Message-ID: <20220624083959.GA145013@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <20220623125442.645240-1-aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20220623125442.645240-1-aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com> X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-GUID: WtIK1D5y3dW8VUAynOaGpFTOxqKVF3DG X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: WtIK1D5y3dW8VUAynOaGpFTOxqKVF3DG X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.205,Aquarius:18.0.883,Hydra:6.0.517,FMLib:17.11.122.1 definitions=2022-06-24_05,2022-06-23_01,2022-06-22_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 clxscore=1011 mlxlogscore=999 impostorscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 phishscore=0 malwarescore=0 bulkscore=0 priorityscore=1501 suspectscore=0 mlxscore=0 spamscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2204290000 definitions=main-2206240032 X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Srikar Dronamraju Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" * Aneesh Kumar K.V [2022-06-23 18:24:41]: > If early cpu to node mapping finds an invalid node id, return > the first online node instead of node 0. > > With commit e75130f20b1f ("powerpc/numa: Offline memoryless cpuless node 0") > the kernel marks node 0 offline in certain scenarios. > > Signed-off-by: Aneesh Kumar K.V > --- > arch/powerpc/include/asm/topology.h | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/topology.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/topology.h > index 8a4d4f4d9749..704088b1d53c 100644 > --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/topology.h > +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/topology.h > @@ -60,7 +60,7 @@ static inline int early_cpu_to_node(int cpu) > * Fall back to node 0 if nid is unset (it should be, except bugs). > * This allows callers to safely do NODE_DATA(early_cpu_to_node(cpu)). > */ > - return (nid < 0) ? 0 : nid; > + return (nid < 0) ? first_online_node : nid; Looks good but just two queries. 1. Is there a possibility of early_cpu_to_node() being called before any node is online? 2. first_online_node is actually not a variable, it returns the lowest online node. Right? If lets a early_cpu_to_node() for the same CPU across a node online/offline may end up giving two different nids. Right? > } > > int of_drconf_to_nid_single(struct drmem_lmb *lmb); > -- > 2.36.1 > -- Thanks and Regards Srikar Dronamraju