[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAErSpo6psgDr3XYh6m+vYcAOix2Vttrwz1jK7bS47Liy2Lw-=g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2014 16:07:25 -0600
From: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>
To: Daniel J Blueman <daniel@...ascale.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Steffen Persvold <sp@...ascale.com>,
"linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
Suravee Suthikulpanit <suravee.suthikulpanit@....com>,
kim.naru@....com,
Aravind Gopalakrishnan <aravind.gopalakrishnan@....com>,
Myron Stowe <myron.stowe@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix northbridge quirk to assign correct NUMA node
[+cc linux-pci, Myron, Suravee, Kim, Aravind]
On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 5:43 AM, Daniel J Blueman <daniel@...ascale.com> wrote:
> For systems with multiple servers and routed fabric, all northbridges get
> assigned to the first server. Fix this by also using the node reported from
> the PCI bus. For single-fabric systems, the northbriges are on PCI bus 0
> by definition, which are on NUMA node 0 by definition, so this is invarient
> on most systems.
>
> Tested on fam10h and fam15h single and multi-fabric systems and candidate
> for stable.
I wish this had been cc'd to linux-pci. We're talking about a related
change by Suravee there. In fact, we were hoping this quirk could be
removed altogether.
I don't understand what this quirk is doing. Normally we discover the
NUMA node for a PCI host bridge via the ACPI _PXM method. The way
_PXM works is that every PCI device in the hierarchy below the bridge
inherits the same node number as the host bridge. I first thought
this might be a workaround for a system that lacks _PXM, but I don't
think that can be right, because you're only changing the node for a
few devices, not the whole hierarchy.
So I suspect the problem is more complicated, and maybe _PXM is
insufficient to describe the topology? Are there subtrees that should
have nodes different from the host bridge?
I know this patch is already in v3.14-rc7, but I'd still like to
understand it so we can do the right thing with Suravee's patch.
Bjorn
> Signed-off-by: Daniel J Blueman <daniel@...ascale.com>
> Acked-by: Steffen Persvold <sp@...ascale.com>
> ---
> arch/x86/kernel/quirks.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/quirks.c b/arch/x86/kernel/quirks.c
> index 04ee1e2..52dbf1e 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/quirks.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/quirks.c
> @@ -529,7 +529,7 @@ static void quirk_amd_nb_node(struct pci_dev *dev)
> return;
>
> pci_read_config_dword(nb_ht, 0x60, &val);
> - node = val & 7;
> + node = pcibus_to_node(dev->bus) | (val & 7);
> /*
> * Some hardware may return an invalid node ID,
> * so check it first:
> --
> 1.8.3.2
>
> --
> 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/
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists