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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43D39FA372A for ; Thu, 17 Oct 2019 12:32:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [203.11.71.2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8ECD02067B for ; Thu, 17 Oct 2019 12:32:14 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 8ECD02067B Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Received: from bilbo.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::3]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46v7pM3WlGzDqX9 for ; Thu, 17 Oct 2019 23:32:11 +1100 (AEDT) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=linux.ibm.com (client-ip=148.163.156.1; helo=mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com; envelope-from=nathanl@linux.ibm.com; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com 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 46v7ht5FRrzDqQn for ; Thu, 17 Oct 2019 23:27:26 +1100 (AEDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0098393.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x9HCOBwL057597; Thu, 17 Oct 2019 08:27:16 -0400 Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2vpnfu6p4n-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 17 Oct 2019 08:27:16 -0400 Received: from m0098393.ppops.net (m0098393.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x9HCQDG0062952; Thu, 17 Oct 2019 08:27:15 -0400 Received: from ppma05wdc.us.ibm.com (1b.90.2fa9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.47.144.27]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2vpnfu6p3u-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 17 Oct 2019 08:27:15 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma05wdc.us.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma05wdc.us.ibm.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x9HCQ0Ia013080; Thu, 17 Oct 2019 12:27:14 GMT Received: from b03cxnp07029.gho.boulder.ibm.com (b03cxnp07029.gho.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.130.16]) by ppma05wdc.us.ibm.com with ESMTP id 2vk6f7ngsx-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 17 Oct 2019 12:27:14 +0000 Received: from b03ledav003.gho.boulder.ibm.com (b03ledav003.gho.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.130.234]) by b03cxnp07029.gho.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id x9HCRD2761341956 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 17 Oct 2019 12:27:13 GMT Received: from b03ledav003.gho.boulder.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F4626A05F; Thu, 17 Oct 2019 12:27:13 +0000 (GMT) Received: from b03ledav003.gho.boulder.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37BEF6A05A; Thu, 17 Oct 2019 12:27:13 +0000 (GMT) Received: from localhost (unknown [9.85.137.196]) by b03ledav003.gho.boulder.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Thu, 17 Oct 2019 12:27:13 +0000 (GMT) From: Nathan Lynch To: Srikar Dronamraju Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/5] Early node associativity In-Reply-To: <87eezvjafs.fsf@linux.ibm.com> References: <20190913110945.12564-1-srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <87eezvjafs.fsf@linux.ibm.com> Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2019 07:27:12 -0500 Message-ID: <87pnivimlb.fsf@linux.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:, , definitions=2019-10-17_04:, , signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=1 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1908290000 definitions=main-1910170114 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: , Cc: Abdul Haleem , Satheesh Rajendran , linuxppc-dev , Nicholas Piggin Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" Nathan Lynch writes: > Srikar Dronamraju writes: >> Abdul reported a warning on a shared lpar. >> "WARNING: workqueue cpumask: online intersect > possible intersect". >> This is because per node workqueue possible mask is set very early in the >> boot process even before the system was querying the home node >> associativity. However per node workqueue online cpumask gets updated >> dynamically. Hence there is a chance when per node workqueue online cpumask >> is a superset of per node workqueue possible mask. > > Sorry for the delay in following up on these. The series looks good to > me, and I've given it a little testing with LPM and DLPAR. I've also > verified that the cpu assignments occur early as intended on an LPAR > where that workqueue warning had been triggered. If this is applied I think we can remove about 500 loc from numa.c. Once splpar cpu-node assignments are done in the same sequence as with dedicated processor mode, numa_update_cpu_topology() and related code becomes unneeded. Michael?