From: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
tglx@linutronix.de, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH x86/mm UPDATED] x86-64, NUMA: Fix distance table handling
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 07:48:00 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4D7A4430.1030301@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110311083351.GD13038@htj.dyndns.org>
On 03/11/2011 12:33 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 09:29:38AM +0100, Tejun Heo wrote:
>> Also, I don't think your patch is correct. Even if there is phys_dist
> ^
> no
>> table, emu distance tables should be built because emulated nids don't
>> map to physical nids one to one. ie. Two different emulated nids can
>> share a physical node and the distance table should explicitly reflect
>> that.
ok, when original SLIT is not there, mean only one really node.
so the new distance table should be filled with LOCAL_DISTANCE.
Yinghai
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-03-11 15:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 68+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-02-24 14:51 [GIT PULL tip:x86/mm] Tejun Heo
2011-02-24 14:52 ` [GIT PULL tip:x86/mm] bootmem,x86: cleanup changes Tejun Heo
2011-02-24 19:08 ` [GIT PULL tip:x86/mm] Yinghai Lu
2011-02-24 19:23 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-02-24 19:28 ` Yinghai Lu
2011-02-24 19:32 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-02-24 19:46 ` Tejun Heo
2011-02-24 22:46 ` [patch] x86, mm: Fix size of numa_distance array David Rientjes
2011-02-24 23:30 ` Yinghai Lu
2011-02-24 23:31 ` David Rientjes
2011-02-25 9:05 ` Tejun Heo
2011-02-25 9:03 ` Tejun Heo
2011-02-25 10:58 ` Tejun Heo
2011-02-25 11:05 ` Tejun Heo
2011-02-25 9:11 ` [PATCH x86-mm] x86-64, NUMA: " Tejun Heo
2011-03-01 17:18 ` [GIT PULL tip:x86/mm] David Rientjes
2011-03-01 18:25 ` Tejun Heo
2011-03-01 22:19 ` Yinghai Lu
2011-03-02 9:17 ` Tejun Heo
2011-03-02 10:04 ` [PATCH x86/mm] x86-64, NUMA: Fix distance table handling Tejun Heo
2011-03-02 10:07 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-03-02 10:15 ` Tejun Heo
2011-03-02 10:36 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-03-02 10:25 ` [PATCH x86/mm UPDATED] " Tejun Heo
2011-03-02 10:39 ` [PATCH x86/mm] x86-64, NUMA: Better explain numa_distance handling Tejun Heo
2011-03-02 10:42 ` [PATCH UPDATED " Tejun Heo
2011-03-02 14:31 ` David Rientjes
2011-03-02 14:30 ` [PATCH x86/mm UPDATED] x86-64, NUMA: Fix distance table handling David Rientjes
2011-03-02 15:42 ` Tejun Heo
2011-03-02 21:12 ` Yinghai Lu
2011-03-02 21:36 ` Yinghai Lu
2011-03-03 20:07 ` David Rientjes
2011-03-04 14:32 ` Tejun Heo
2011-03-03 20:04 ` David Rientjes
2011-03-03 20:00 ` David Rientjes
2011-03-04 15:31 ` [PATCH x86/mm] x86-64, NUMA: Don't assume phys node 0 is always online in numa_emulation() handling Tejun Heo
2011-03-04 21:33 ` David Rientjes
2011-03-05 7:50 ` Tejun Heo
2011-03-05 15:50 ` [tip:x86/mm] x86-64, NUMA: Don't assume phys node 0 is always online in numa_emulation() tip-bot for Tejun Heo
2011-03-02 16:16 ` [PATCH x86/mm UPDATED] x86-64, NUMA: Fix distance table handling Yinghai Lu
2011-03-02 16:37 ` Tejun Heo
2011-03-02 16:46 ` Yinghai Lu
2011-03-02 16:55 ` Tejun Heo
2011-03-02 18:52 ` Yinghai Lu
2011-03-02 19:02 ` Tejun Heo
2011-03-02 19:06 ` Yinghai Lu
2011-03-02 19:13 ` Tejun Heo
2011-03-02 20:32 ` Yinghai Lu
2011-03-02 20:57 ` Tejun Heo
2011-03-02 21:14 ` Yinghai Lu
2011-03-03 6:17 ` Tejun Heo
2011-03-10 18:46 ` Yinghai Lu
2011-03-11 8:29 ` Tejun Heo
2011-03-11 8:33 ` Tejun Heo
2011-03-11 15:48 ` Yinghai Lu [this message]
2011-03-11 15:54 ` Tejun Heo
2011-03-11 18:02 ` Yinghai Lu
2011-03-11 18:19 ` Tejun Heo
2011-03-11 18:25 ` Yinghai Lu
2011-03-11 18:29 ` Tejun Heo
2011-03-11 18:45 ` Yinghai Lu
2011-03-11 9:31 ` [PATCH x86/mm] x86-64, NUMA: Don't call numa_set_distanc() for all possible node combinations during emulation Tejun Heo
2011-03-11 15:42 ` Yinghai Lu
2011-03-11 16:03 ` Tejun Heo
2011-03-11 19:05 ` Yinghai Lu
2011-03-02 10:43 ` [PATCH x86/mm] x86-64, NUMA: Fix distance table handling Ingo Molnar
2011-03-02 10:53 ` Tejun Heo
2011-03-02 10:59 ` 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=4D7A4430.1030301@kernel.org \
--to=yinghai@kernel.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tj@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).