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

Date:	Mon, 25 Feb 2013 22:57:38 -0800
From:	Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
To:	Tang Chen <tangchen@...fujitsu.com>
Cc:	Martin Bligh <mbligh@...igh.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Don Morris <don.morris@...com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Tim Gardner <tim.gardner@...onical.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com,
	x86@...nel.org, a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl, jarkko.sakkinen@...el.com
Subject: Re: sched: CPU #1's llc-sibling CPU #0 is not on the same node!

On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 10:09 PM, Tang Chen <tangchen@...fujitsu.com> wrote:
> On 02/26/2013 12:51 PM, Martin Bligh wrote:
>>>
>>> Do you mean we can remove numaq x86 32bit code now?
>>
>>
>> Wouldn't bother me at all. The machine is from 1995, end of life c. 2000?
>> Was useful in the early days of getting NUMA up and running on Linux,
>> but is now too old to be a museum piece, really.
>>
>> M.
>>
>
> Hi Martin, Yinghai,
>
> It was me that I failed to make numa_init() fall back path working, and
> forgot
> to call early_parse_srat in ia64. Sorry for the breaking of other platform.
> :)
>
> So now, is Yinghai's patch enough for this problem ?
> Or we can encapsulate the following clear up work into one function ?
>
>
> +               for (i = 0; i < MAX_LOCAL_APIC; i++)
> +                       set_apicid_to_node(i, NUMA_NO_NODE);
> +               nodes_clear(numa_nodes_parsed);
> +               memset(&numa_meminfo, 0, sizeof(numa_meminfo));
>
>

That is temporary workaround and your patch and this workaround make
x86 acpi numa init too messy.

I don't see the point to hack SRAT to make memory hotplug working.

Do you guys check and use PMTT in ACPI spec instead?

Yinghai
--
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/