linux-kernel - Re: [BUG] rebuild_sched_domains considered dangerous

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

Date:	Wed, 09 Mar 2011 14:33:56 +0100
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>
Cc:	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
	Jesse Larrew <jlarrew@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [BUG] rebuild_sched_domains considered dangerous

On Wed, 2011-03-09 at 14:31 +0100, Martin Schwidefsky wrote:
> > But if you don't also update the cpu->node memory mappings (which I
> > think it near impossible) what good is it to change the scheduler
> > topology?
> 
> The memory for the different LPARs is striped over all nodes (or books as we
> call them). We heavily rely on the large shared cache between the books to hide
> the different memory access latencies. 

Right, so effectively you don't have NUMA due to that striping. So why
then change the CPU topology? Simply create a topology without NUMA and
keep it static, that accurately reflects the memory topology.


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/