From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932466AbVHRVcn (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Aug 2005 17:32:43 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932468AbVHRVcn (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Aug 2005 17:32:43 -0400 Received: from ns1.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:41377 "EHLO mx1.suse.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932466AbVHRVcm (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Aug 2005 17:32:42 -0400 Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2005 23:32:37 +0200 From: Andi Kleen To: Samuel Thibault , Eric Dumazet , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, lse-tech@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Lse-tech] Re: idle task's task_t allocation on NUMA machines Message-ID: <20050818213236.GC3953@verdi.suse.de> References: <20050818140829.GB8123@implementation.labri.fr> <4304A6DF.6040703@cosmosbay.com> <20050818194941.GH8822@bouh.labri.fr> <20050818200255.GI8822@bouh.labri.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050818200255.GI8822@bouh.labri.fr> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Aug 18, 2005 at 10:02:55PM +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote: > Samuel Thibault, le Thu 18 Aug 2005 21:49:41 +0200, a ?crit : > > Eric Dumazet, le Thu 18 Aug 2005 17:18:55 +0200, a ?crit : > > > I believe IRQ stacks are also allocated on node 0, that seems more serious. > > > > For the i386 architecture at least, yes: they are statically defined in > > arch/i386/kernel/irq.c, while they could be per_cpu. > > Hum, but the per_cpu areas for i386 are not numa-aware... I'm wondering: > isn't the current x86_64 numa-aware implementation of per_cpu generic > enough for any architecture? Actually it's broken for many x86-64 configurations now that use SRAT because we assign the nodes to CPUs only after this code runs. I was considering to remove it. -Andi