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=-3.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,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 C7E92C4338F for ; Mon, 23 Aug 2021 09:39:50 +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 306B261186 for ; Mon, 23 Aug 2021 09:39:50 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org 306B261186 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lists.ozlabs.org Received: from boromir.ozlabs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4GtRzS69lVz2yn8 for ; Mon, 23 Aug 2021 19:39:48 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; secure) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=casper.20170209 header.b=kSkRM+Ll; dkim-atps=neutral Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=none (no SPF record) smtp.mailfrom=infradead.org (client-ip=2001:8b0:10b:1236::1; helo=casper.infradead.org; envelope-from=peterz@infradead.org; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; secure) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=casper.20170209 header.b=kSkRM+Ll; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from casper.infradead.org (casper.infradead.org [IPv6:2001:8b0:10b:1236::1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4GtRyF4fQ5z2xtM for ; Mon, 23 Aug 2021 19:38:44 +1000 (AEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=casper.20170209; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version: References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=TFmRCKg4zXF97Z6BgErRkb8Iycca9xXXxIRl12/WHgg=; b=kSkRM+LlJJrTsSvfM6O/7XH1Tz Ci3sp3o7sH6IKjlsicobpfxSPyEeMfpXnArHbkefEJF2Q29bAGCkeVGrZxZ00i5Ss9dkR6qeO04zY +WtCnQlwHA7stH2WCpaf4bMAkw5MEoL2Z6JwtYV1lW2N4MNElr0rAo/azyGIlWKOwWhSdnGzRsrFX itE5xwH0nBbNlt6ecP134A5E2Iai0zu59/BEFcgfoC+lpMtjoUJX0gOTm33t3/LPrm7kQ4QHllPZp NzJ2vFtruTSN+pGNTBuFtxA24L5vbWM2VYfdZpm8SrQg57PSIthkMKP99J5xu1l0UB+A27wgIs6kl cMdIAgIQ==; Received: from j217100.upc-j.chello.nl ([24.132.217.100] helo=noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net) by casper.infradead.org with esmtpsa (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1mI6OP-009YNm-5D; Mon, 23 Aug 2021 09:37:34 +0000 Received: from hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net (hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net [192.168.1.225]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5169C300399; Mon, 23 Aug 2021 11:37:19 +0200 (CEST) Received: by hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 2FE8F202294B8; Mon, 23 Aug 2021 11:37:19 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2021 11:37:19 +0200 From: Peter Zijlstra To: Srikar Dronamraju Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] Updates to powerpc for robust CPU online/offline Message-ID: References: <20210821102535.169643-1-srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20210823093437.GJ21942@linux.vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210823093437.GJ21942@linux.vnet.ibm.com> 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: Nathan Lynch , Gautham R Shenoy , Vincent Guittot , Geetika Moolchandani , Valentin Schneider , Laurent Dufour , linuxppc-dev , Ingo Molnar Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" On Mon, Aug 23, 2021 at 03:04:37PM +0530, Srikar Dronamraju wrote: > * Peter Zijlstra [2021-08-23 10:33:30]: > > > On Sat, Aug 21, 2021 at 03:55:32PM +0530, Srikar Dronamraju wrote: > > > Scheduler expects unique number of node distances to be available > > > at boot. It uses node distance to calculate this unique node > > > distances. On Power Servers, node distances for offline nodes is not > > > available. However, Power Servers already knows unique possible node > > > distances. Fake the offline node's distance_lookup_table entries so > > > that all possible node distances are updated. > > > > > > For example distance info from numactl from a fully populated 8 node > > > system at boot may look like this. > > > > > > node distances: > > > node 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 > > > 0: 10 20 40 40 40 40 40 40 > > > 1: 20 10 40 40 40 40 40 40 > > > 2: 40 40 10 20 40 40 40 40 > > > 3: 40 40 20 10 40 40 40 40 > > > 4: 40 40 40 40 10 20 40 40 > > > 5: 40 40 40 40 20 10 40 40 > > > 6: 40 40 40 40 40 40 10 20 > > > 7: 40 40 40 40 40 40 20 10 > > > > > > However the same system when only two nodes are online at boot, then > > > distance info from numactl will look like > > > node distances: > > > node 0 1 > > > 0: 10 20 > > > 1: 20 10 > > > > > > With the faked numa distance at boot, the node distance table will look > > > like > > > node 0 1 2 > > > 0: 10 20 40 > > > 1: 20 10 40 > > > 2: 40 40 10 > > > > > > The actual distance will be populated once the nodes are onlined. > > > > How did you want all this merged? I picked up Valentin's patch, do you > > want me to pick up these PowerPC patches in the same tree, or do you > > want to route them seperately? > > While both (the patch you accepted and this series) together help solve the > problem, I think there is no hard dependency between the two. Hence I would > think it should be okay to go through the powerpc tree. > OK, works for me, thanks!