From: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>,
"Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com>,
Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams.intel.com@linux.intel.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH] x86, cpu: Fix node state for whether it contains CPU
Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 16:26:49 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160824232647.GA21759@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In current kernel code, we only call node_set_state(cpu_to_node(cpu),
N_CPU) when a cpu is hot plugged. But we do not set the node state for
N_CPU when the cpus are brought online during boot.
So this could lead to failure when we check to see
if a node contains cpu with node_state(node_id, N_CPU).
One use case is in the node_reclaime function:
/*
* Only run node reclaim on the local node or on nodes that do
* not
* have associated processors. This will favor the local
* processor
* over remote processors and spread off node memory allocations
* as wide as possible.
*/
if (node_state(pgdat->node_id, N_CPU) && pgdat->node_id !=
numa_node_id())
return NODE_RECLAIM_NOSCAN;
I instrumented the kernel to call this function after boot and it
always returns 0 on a x86 desktop machine until I apply
the attached patch.
static int num_cpu_node(void)
{
int i, nr_cpu_nodes = 0;
for_each_node(i) {
if (node_state(i, N_CPU))
++ nr_cpu_nodes;
}
return nr_cpu_nodes;
}
I have not tested other architectues but they are likely
to have similar issue.
Signed-off-by: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>
---
arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c b/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c
index d8f7d01..04c0574 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c
@@ -259,6 +259,7 @@ static void notrace start_secondary(void *unused)
lock_vector_lock();
setup_vector_irq(smp_processor_id());
set_cpu_online(smp_processor_id(), true);
+ node_set_state(cpu_to_node(smp_processor_id()), N_CPU);
unlock_vector_lock();
cpu_set_state_online(smp_processor_id());
x86_platform.nmi_init();
--
2.5.5
next reply other threads:[~2016-08-24 23:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-08-24 23:26 Tim Chen [this message]
2016-08-29 13:36 ` [PATCH] x86, cpu: Fix node state for whether it contains CPU Peter Zijlstra
2016-08-29 17:44 ` Tim Chen
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=20160824232647.GA21759@linux.intel.com \
--to=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=dan.j.williams.intel.com@linux.intel.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=ying.huang@intel.com \
/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