From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753447Ab3B0HpV (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Feb 2013 02:45:21 -0500 Received: from cn.fujitsu.com ([222.73.24.84]:4879 "EHLO song.cn.fujitsu.com" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752537Ab3B0HpU (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Feb 2013 02:45:20 -0500 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,746,1355068800"; d="scan'208";a="6778648" Message-ID: <512DB96E.5030408@cn.fujitsu.com> Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2013 15:44:46 +0800 From: Tang Chen User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120430 Thunderbird/12.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Yinghai Lu CC: Yasuaki Ishimatsu , Andrew Morton , Don Morris , Tim Gardner , "H. Peter Anvin" , Linus Torvalds , Tejun Heo , Tony Luck , Thomas Renninger , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl, jarkko.sakkinen@intel.com Subject: Re: sched: CPU #1's llc-sibling CPU #0 is not on the same node! References: <512B7D10.4060304@tpi.com> <512B8407.2090807@canonical.com> <512BD753.4080001@hp.com> <512D58C2.1090403@jp.fujitsu.com> <512D7FAD.1040003@jp.fujitsu.com> <512D8EDA.3010602@jp.fujitsu.com> <512D9E69.6010102@jp.fujitsu.com> <512DB199.5050203@cn.fujitsu.com> In-Reply-To: X-MIMETrack: Itemize by SMTP Server on mailserver/fnst(Release 8.5.3|September 15, 2011) at 2013/02/27 15:44:26, Serialize by Router on mailserver/fnst(Release 8.5.3|September 15, 2011) at 2013/02/27 15:44:27, Serialize complete at 2013/02/27 15:44:27 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 02/27/2013 03:25 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote: > On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 11:11 PM, Tang Chen wrote: >> On 02/27/2013 02:54 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote: >>> >>> Those patches are tangled together. >> >> >> No, they are not. >> >> The following commits supports "movablemem_map=nn[KMG]@ss[KMG]". >> >> commit fb06bc8e5f42f38c011de0e59481f464a82380f6 >> page_alloc: bootmem limit with movablecore_map >> commit 42f47e27e761fee07da69e04612ec7dd0d490edd >> page_alloc: make movablemem_map have higher priority >> commit 6981ec31146cf19454c55c130625f6cee89aab95 >> page_alloc: introduce zone_movable_limit[] to keep movable limit for nodes >> commit 34b71f1e04fcba578e719e675b4882eeeb2a1f6f >> page_alloc: add movable_memmap kernel parameter >> commit 4d59a75125d5a4717e57e9fc62c64b3d346e603e >> x86: get pg_data_t's memory from other node >> >> And the following supports "movablemem_map=srat". >> >> commit f7210e6c4ac795694106c1c5307134d3fc233e88 >> mm/memblock.c: use CONFIG_HAVE_MEMBLOCK_NODE_MAP to protect movablecore_map in memblock_overlaps_region(). >> commit 01a178a94e8eaec351b29ee49fbb3d1c124cb7fb >> acpi, memory-hotplug: support getting hotplug info from SRAT >> commit 27168d38fa209073219abedbe6a9de7ba9acbfad >> acpi, memory-hotplug: extend movablemem_map ranges to the end of node >> commit e8d1955258091e4c92d5a975ebd7fd8a98f5d30f >> acpi, memory-hotplug: parse SRAT before memblock is ready > > those four can be reverted cleanly? Sorry, if you want to revert, you just need to revert: commit e8d1955258091e4c92d5a975ebd7fd8a98f5d30f acpi, memory-hotplug: parse SRAT before memblock is ready commit 01a178a94e8eaec351b29ee49fbb3d1c124cb7fb acpi, memory-hotplug: support getting hotplug info from SRAT The other two have nothing to do with SRAT. And they are necessary. Seeing from the code, I think it is clean. But we'd better test it. > >> >>> >>> Also it looks funny to ask user to specify mem range in boot command >>> line to enable mem hotplug. >> >> >> Well, I think sometimes users don't like the SRAT memory style, and want to >> increase or reduce hot-pluggable memory by themselves. And also, it is >> useful >> for debuging firmware bugs. >> >> I agree that "movablemem_map=srat" functionality need more work to improve. >> Can we not revert it, and improve it during 3.9rc ? I think during rc time, >> at least we can fix the problems brought by early_parse_srat(). > > looks like acpi_override can not be fixed. About this problem, I need to do some investigation, and I think we can have a try. I do hope we can keep these patches. And put the improve work in the future. :) Thanks. :)