From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752721AbZHXPdZ (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Aug 2009 11:33:25 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752527AbZHXPdX (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Aug 2009 11:33:23 -0400 Received: from casper.infradead.org ([85.118.1.10]:56569 "EHLO casper.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752685AbZHXPdV (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Aug 2009 11:33:21 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH 12/15] sched: Allow NODE domain to be parent of MC instead of CPU domain From: Peter Zijlstra To: Andreas Herrmann Cc: Ingo Molnar , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20090820134245.GA29327@alberich.amd.com> References: <20090820131243.GO29327@alberich.amd.com> <20090820134245.GA29327@alberich.amd.com> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 17:32:40 +0200 Message-Id: <1251127960.7538.298.camel@twins> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.26.1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2009-08-20 at 15:42 +0200, Andreas Herrmann wrote: > The level of NODE domain's child domain is provided in s_data.numa_child_level. > Then several adaptions are required when creating the domain hierarchy. > In case NODE domain is parent of MC domain we have to: > - limit NODE domains' span in sched_domain_node_span() to not exceed > corresponding topology_core_cpumask. > - fix CPU domain span to cover entire cpu_map > - fix CPU domain sched groups to cover entire physical groups instead of > covering a node (a node sched_group might be a proper subset of a CPU > sched_group). > - use correct child domain in init_numa_sched_groups_power() when > calculating sched_group.__cpu_power in NODE domain > - calculate group_power of NODE domain after its child domain > > Note: As I have no idea when the ALLNODES domain is required > I assumed that an ALLNODES domain exists only if NODE domain > is parent of CPU domain. I think its only used when the regular node level is too large, then we split it into smaller bits. SGI folks who run crazy large machines use this. /me mumbels about renaming the domain level, CPU is the physical socket level, right? stupid names. Patch sounds funky though, numa_child_level should be effident from the tree build.