From: zhong jiang <zhongjiang@huawei.com>
To: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
Cc: Ganapatrao Kulkarni <gpkulkarni@gmail.com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
Ganapatrao Kulkarni <gkulkarni@caviumnetworks.com>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm, numa: boot cpu should bound to the node0 when node_off enable
Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2016 15:47:23 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <57BBFF8B.80801@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160822142833.GE26494@e104818-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
On 2016/8/22 22:28, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 05:38:59PM +0800, zhong jiang wrote:
>> On 2016/8/19 12:11, Ganapatrao Kulkarni wrote:
>>> On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 9:30 AM, Ganapatrao Kulkarni
>>> <gpkulkarni@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 7:28 AM, zhong jiang <zhongjiang@huawei.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 2016/8/19 1:45, Ganapatrao Kulkarni wrote:
>>>>>> On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 9:34 PM, Catalin Marinas
>>>>>> <catalin.marinas@arm.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 09:09:26PM +0800, zhongjiang wrote:
>>>>>>>> At present, boot cpu will bound to a node from device tree when node_off enable.
>>>>>>>> if the node is not initialization, it will lead to a following problem.
> [...]
>>>>>>>> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c
>>>>>>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c
>>>>>>>> @@ -119,7 +119,7 @@ void numa_store_cpu_info(unsigned int cpu)
>>>>>>>> void __init early_map_cpu_to_node(unsigned int cpu, int nid)
>>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>> /* fallback to node 0 */
>>>>>>>> - if (nid < 0 || nid >= MAX_NUMNODES)
>>>>>>>> + if (nid < 0 || nid >= MAX_NUMNODES || numa_off)
>>>>>> i did not understood how this line change fixes the issue that you
>>>>>> have mentioned (i too not understood fully the issue description)
>>>>>> this array used while mapping node id when secondary cores comes up
>>>>>> when numa_off is set the cpu_to_node_map[cpu] is not used and set to
>>>>>> node0 always( refer function numa_store_cpu_info)..
>>>>>> please provide more details to understand the issue you are facing.
>>>>>> /*
>>>>>> * Set the cpu to node and mem mapping
>>>>>> */
>>>>>> void numa_store_cpu_info(unsigned int cpu)
>>>>>> {
>>>>>> map_cpu_to_node(cpu, numa_off ? 0 : cpu_to_node_map[cpu]);
>>>>>> }
>>>>> The issue comes up when we test the kdump. it will leads to kernel crash.
>>>>> when I debug the issue, I find boot cpu actually bound to the node1. while
>>>>> node1 is not real existence when numa_off enable.
>>>> boot cpu is default mapped to node0
>>>> are you running with any other patches?
>>> if you added any patch to change this code
>>> /* init boot processor */
>>> cpu_to_node_map[0] = 0;
>>> map_cpu_to_node(0, 0);
>>>
>>> then adding code to take-care numa_off here might solve your issue.
>> but in of_smp_init_cpus, boot cpu will call early_map_cpu_to_node[] to get
>> the relation node. and the node is from devicetree.
>>
>> you points to the code will be covered with another node. therefore, it is
>> possible that cpu_to_node[cpu] will leads to the incorrect results. therefore,
>> The crash will come up.
> I think I get Ganapat's point. The cpu_to_node_map[0] may be incorrectly
> set by early_map_cpu_to_node() when called from smp_init_cpus() ->
> of_parse_and_init_cpus(). However, the cpu_to_node_map[] array is *only*
> read by numa_store_cpu_info(). This latter function calls
> map_cpu_to_node() and, if numa_off, will only ever pass 0 as the nid.
>
> Given that the cpu_to_node_map[] array is static, I don't see how any
> non-zero value could leak outside the arch/arm64/mm/numa.c file.
>
> So please give more details of any additional patches you have on top of
> mainline or whether you reproduced this issue with the vanilla kernel
> (since you mentioned kdump, that's not in mainline yet).
>
Thanks for Catalin and Ganapatral.
I am sorry for that. The mainline have solved. The mainline changes is too much, I did not notice.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-08-23 7:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-08-18 13:09 [PATCH] mm,numa: boot cpu should bound to the node0 when node_off enable zhongjiang
2016-08-18 16:04 ` [PATCH] mm, numa: " Catalin Marinas
2016-08-18 17:45 ` Ganapatrao Kulkarni
2016-08-19 1:41 ` zhong jiang
2016-08-19 1:58 ` zhong jiang
2016-08-19 4:00 ` Ganapatrao Kulkarni
2016-08-19 4:11 ` Ganapatrao Kulkarni
2016-08-20 9:38 ` zhong jiang
2016-08-22 14:28 ` Catalin Marinas
2016-08-23 7:47 ` zhong jiang [this message]
2016-08-23 11:19 ` Leizhen (ThunderTown)
2016-08-23 11:30 ` Will Deacon
2016-08-23 11:50 ` Leizhen (ThunderTown)
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=57BBFF8B.80801@huawei.com \
--to=zhongjiang@huawei.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=gkulkarni@caviumnetworks.com \
--cc=gpkulkarni@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.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