From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>, Brian Gerst <brgerst@gmail.com>,
Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com>,
Shaohui Zheng <shaohui.zheng@intel.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] x86-64, NUMA: fix fakenuma boot failure
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 00:05:51 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110414150551.GC21397@mtj.dyndns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110414095059.080E.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com>
Hello,
On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 09:51:00AM +0900, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> hmm... My carbon copy is not corrupted. Maybe crappy intermediate
> server override it ?
Sorry about that. Problem was on my side.
The patch itself looks good to me now, so,
Acked-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
but I have some nitpicky comments and it would be nice if you can
respin the patch with the suggested updates.
> Currently, numa=fake boot parameter is broken. If it's used, kernel
> doesn't boot and makes panic by zero divide error.
"kernel may panic due to devide by zero error depending on CPU
configuration"
> The zero divede is caused following line. (ie group->cpu_power==0)
>
> update_sg_lb_stats()
Maybe it would be a good idea to prefix the above with filename, ie -
"kernel/sched_fail.c::update_sg_lb_stats()"
> This is regression since commit e23bba6044 (x86-64, NUMA: Unify
> emulated distance mapping). Because It drop fake_physnodes() and
> then cpu-node mapping was changed.
"This is a regression caused by blah blah because it changes cpu ->
node mapping in the process of dropping fake_physnodes()"
> old) all cpus are assinged node 0
> now) cpus are assigned round robin
> (the logic is implemented by numa_init_array())
It would be nice to note that the above happens only for CPUs which
lack explicit NUMA configuration information.
> Why round robin assignment doesn't work? Because init_numa_sched_groups_power()
> assume all logical cpus in the same physical cpu are assigned the same node.
^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^
assumes share
> (Then it only account group_first_cpu()). But the simple round robin
^^^^^^^ ^^^^^
accounts for probably ", and" would work better here
> broke the above assumption.
^^^^^
breaks
> Thus, this patch implement to reassigne node-id if buggy firmware or numa
> emulation makes wrong cpu node map.
It would be nice if you can detail the solution a bit more. What it's
doing, which configuration it affects and so on.
> + /*
> + * Our CPU scheduler assume all logical cpus in the same physical cpu
> + * package are assigned the same node. But, Buggy ACPI table or NUMA
> + * emulation might assign them to different node. Fix it.
> + */
Care to make the above a docbook comment?
Thank you.
--
tejun
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-04-14 15:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20110408235739.A6B0.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com>
2011-04-08 16:43 ` [PATCH] x86-64, NUMA: reimplement cpu node map initialization for fake numa Tejun Heo
2011-04-11 1:58 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-04-12 4:00 ` Tejun Heo
2011-04-12 4:38 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-04-12 6:31 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-04-12 7:13 ` Tejun Heo
2011-04-13 7:02 ` [PATCH] x86-64, NUMA: fix fakenuma boot failure KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-04-13 19:32 ` Tejun Heo
2011-04-14 0:51 ` [PATCH v2] " KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-04-14 15:05 ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2011-04-15 11:39 ` [PATCH v3] " KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-04-15 15:35 ` Tejun Heo
2011-04-15 19:24 ` [tip:x86/urgent] x86, NUMA: Fix " tip-bot for KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-04-14 6:44 ` [PATCH] x86-64, NUMA: fix " Ingo Molnar
2011-04-14 14:49 ` Tejun Heo
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20110414150551.GC21397@mtj.dyndns.org \
--to=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=brgerst@gmail.com \
--cc=gorcunov@gmail.com \
--cc=hpa@linux.intel.com \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=shaohui.zheng@intel.com \
--cc=yinghai@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).