linux-kernel - Re: sched: CPU #1's llc-sibling CPU #0 is not on the same node!

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 28 Feb 2013 23:43:45 -0800
From:	Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
To:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
	Stefano Stabellini <Stefano.Stabellini@...citrix.com>
Cc:	Tang Chen <tangchen@...fujitsu.com>,
	Yasuaki Ishimatsu <isimatu.yasuaki@...fujitsu.com>,
	Don Morris <don.morris@...com>,
	Tim Gardner <tim.gardner@...onical.com>,
	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
	Thomas Renninger <trenn@...e.de>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
Subject: Re: sched: CPU #1's llc-sibling CPU #0 is not on the same node!

[trim down CC list a bit]

On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 9:00 PM, Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org> wrote:
>
>
> On Thursday, February 28, 2013, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>>
>> On 02/28/2013 08:32 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>> > Yingai, Andrew,
>> >  is this ok with you two?
>> >
>> >         Linus
>>
>> FWIW, it makes sense to me iff it resolves the problems
>
>
> I prefer to reverting all 8 patches.
>
> Actually I have worked out one patch that could solve all problems, but it
> is too intrusive that I do      not want to split it to small pieces to post
> it.
>
> Leaving the movablemem_map related changes in  the upstream tree, will
> prevent me from continuing to make memblock to be used to allocate page
> table on local node ram for hot add.
>
> Will send reverting patch and putting page table on local node patch around
> 10pm after I get home.

Please check attached patches.

Plan A. revert all 8 patches:
    revert_movablemem_map.patch

Plan B. fix movablemem_map:
    kill_max_low_pfn_mapped.patch and fix_movablemem_map.patch

fix_movablemem_map.patch is too risky, and need more test.

Konrad, Stefano:
Can you check kill_max_low_pfn_mapped.patch and fix_movablemem_map.patch
on top of today's Linus tree to check if it breaks Xen?

Thanks

Yinghai

Download attachment "revert_movablemem_map.patch" of type "application/octet-stream" (31559 bytes)

Download attachment "kill_max_low_pfn_mapped.patch" of type "application/octet-stream" (3581 bytes)

Download attachment "fix_movablemem_map.patch" of type "application/octet-stream" (17331 bytes)