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=-15.1 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham 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 2E2D0C433B4 for ; Mon, 10 May 2021 13:01:57 +0000 (UTC) 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 mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 10D1361040 for ; Mon, 10 May 2021 13:01:55 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 10D1361040 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 boromir.ozlabs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4Ff1R62VPtz305v for ; Mon, 10 May 2021 23:01:54 +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=tCvMjw3P; dkim-atps=neutral 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=ldufour@linux.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=tCvMjw3P; 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 4Ff1QT6ckDz2ym4 for ; Mon, 10 May 2021 23:01:20 +1000 (AEST) Received: from pps.filterd (m0098399.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with SMTP id 14ACY4lv035857; Mon, 10 May 2021 09:01:11 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=subject : to : cc : references : from : message-id : date : mime-version : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding; s=pp1; bh=JKevJ24GbocfghegZ4JHnukiJZdjdLq2k563NxcWWeI=; b=tCvMjw3PSaPSTkw09rCM69rRXfzCUvA1LWRBdH7TOxcRJX7s0Z62yGPzMCjZFSXDkugs XRLX4A+9OdowwaxniXBOiE7/Ni/qO4YD1OX8BHVgJIbbqCE+3IOvRvDJNCVGrCIJ06pi Ir1e1PZmBLZMUcmH+MSAN5JOBbSRVGPpUfSD31ODwNxC5c79NCar/cxDqhLSFrIvp/kb 7sHIeoo+ytaqxLDTZ7Eicwx5p+GDh7e/8V+05xS8IFBobe13LGedYW3b0SLx938oXQGJ daDXit8oB+FwqlypH9h2uQSqxQf98WQaCxM1lg7RETw8BfwtGDeFXZtP5j2KtqWohpcu jw== Received: from ppma04fra.de.ibm.com (6a.4a.5195.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [149.81.74.106]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 38f30bmgrc-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 10 May 2021 09:01:10 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma04fra.de.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma04fra.de.ibm.com (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with SMTP id 14ACimxU009453; Mon, 10 May 2021 13:01:05 GMT Received: from b06cxnps3075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06relay10.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.109.195]) by ppma04fra.de.ibm.com with ESMTP id 38ef37ganr-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 10 May 2021 13:01:05 +0000 Received: from b06wcsmtp001.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (b06wcsmtp001.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.160]) by b06cxnps3075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 14AD12Lj30671318 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 10 May 2021 13:01:02 GMT Received: from b06wcsmtp001.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FDF8A4054; Mon, 10 May 2021 13:01:02 +0000 (GMT) Received: from b06wcsmtp001.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBA3FA4065; Mon, 10 May 2021 13:01:01 +0000 (GMT) Received: from pomme.local (unknown [9.145.174.43]) by b06wcsmtp001.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Mon, 10 May 2021 13:01:01 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Re: [PATCH] ppc64/numa: consider the max numa node for migratable LPAR To: Srikar Dronamraju References: <20210429181901.17674-1-ldufour@linux.ibm.com> <20210510102107.GR2633526@linux.vnet.ibm.com> From: Laurent Dufour Message-ID: <97b19b51-783c-ba64-bb21-5ebedeebc4f0@linux.ibm.com> Date: Mon, 10 May 2021 15:01:01 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.10.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20210510102107.GR2633526@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-GUID: wKE8B6PLpZTCzA5MjXwJNq6MDO5xMmUf X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: wKE8B6PLpZTCzA5MjXwJNq6MDO5xMmUf X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.391, 18.0.761 definitions=2021-05-10_07:2021-05-10, 2021-05-10 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 priorityscore=1501 mlxlogscore=999 spamscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 clxscore=1015 suspectscore=0 bulkscore=0 malwarescore=0 impostorscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2104190000 definitions=main-2105100090 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: nathanl@linux.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, paulus@samba.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" Le 10/05/2021 à 12:21, Srikar Dronamraju a écrit : > * Laurent Dufour [2021-04-29 20:19:01]: > >> When a LPAR is migratable, we should consider the maximum possible NUMA >> node instead the number of NUMA node from the actual system. >> >> The DT property 'ibm,current-associativity-domains' is defining the maximum >> number of nodes the LPAR can see when running on that box. But if the LPAR >> is being migrated on another box, it may seen up to the nodes defined by >> 'ibm,max-associativity-domains'. So if a LPAR is migratable, that value >> should be used. >> >> Unfortunately, there is no easy way to know if a LPAR is migratable or >> not. The hypervisor is exporting the property 'ibm,migratable-partition' in >> the case it set to migrate partition, but that would not mean that the >> current partition is migratable. >> >> Without that patch, when a LPAR is started on a 2 nodes box and then >> migrated to a 3 nodes box, the hypervisor may spread the LPAR's CPUs on the >> 3rd node. In that case if a CPU from that 3rd node is added to the LPAR, it >> will be wrongly assigned to the node because the kernel has been set to use > > >> up to 2 nodes (the configuration of the departure node). With that patch >> applies, the CPU is correctly added to the 3rd node. > > You probably meant, "With this patch applied" > > Also you may want to add a fixes tag: I'll fix "that" and add the fixes tag. >> Cc: Srikar Dronamraju >> Signed-off-by: Laurent Dufour >> --- >> arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c | 14 +++++++++++--- >> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c b/arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c >> index f2bf98bdcea2..673fa6e47850 100644 >> --- a/arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c >> +++ b/arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c >> @@ -893,7 +893,7 @@ static void __init setup_node_data(int nid, u64 start_pfn, u64 end_pfn) >> static void __init find_possible_nodes(void) >> { >> struct device_node *rtas; >> - const __be32 *domains; >> + const __be32 *domains = NULL; >> int prop_length, max_nodes; >> u32 i; >> >> @@ -909,9 +909,14 @@ static void __init find_possible_nodes(void) >> * it doesn't exist, then fallback on ibm,max-associativity-domains. >> * Current denotes what the platform can support compared to max >> * which denotes what the Hypervisor can support. >> + * >> + * If the LPAR is migratable, new nodes might be activated after a LPM, >> + * so we should consider the max number in that case. >> */ >> - domains = of_get_property(rtas, "ibm,current-associativity-domains", >> - &prop_length); >> + if (!of_get_property(of_root, "ibm,migratable-partition", NULL)) >> + domains = of_get_property(rtas, >> + "ibm,current-associativity-domains", >> + &prop_length); >> if (!domains) { >> domains = of_get_property(rtas, "ibm,max-associativity-domains", >> &prop_length); >> @@ -920,6 +925,9 @@ static void __init find_possible_nodes(void) >> } >> >> max_nodes = of_read_number(&domains[min_common_depth], 1); >> + printk(KERN_INFO "Partition configured for %d NUMA nodes.\n", >> + max_nodes); >> + > > Another nit: > you may want to make this pr_info instead of printk Sure ! >> for (i = 0; i < max_nodes; i++) { >> if (!node_possible(i)) >> node_set(i, node_possible_map); >> -- >> 2.31.1 >> > > Otherwise looks good to me. > > Reviewed-by: Srikar Dronamraju Thanks Srikar, I'll add you review tag in the v2.