[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140420102105.GA19676@pd.tnic>
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2014 12:21:05 +0200
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>
To: Myron Stowe <myron.stowe@...hat.com>
Cc: bhelgaas@...gle.com, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
suravee.suthikulpanit@....com, aravind.gopalakrishnan@....com,
kim.naru@....com, daniel@...ascale.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
mingo@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com, x86@...nel.org, sp@...ascale.com,
linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] ACPI/PCI: Warn if we have to "guess" host bridge
node information
On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 08:53:39PM -0600, Myron Stowe wrote:
> The vast majority of platforms are not supplying ACPI _PXM (proximity)
> information corresponding to host bridge (PNP0A03/PNP0A08) devices
> resulting in sysfs "numa_node" values of -1 (NUMA_NO_NODE) [1]:
> # for i in /sys/devices/pci0000\:00/*/numa_node; do cat $i; done | uniq
> -1
>
> # find /sys/ -name "numa_node" | while read fname; do cat $fname; \
> done | uniq
> -1
>
> AMD based platforms provide a fall-back for this situation via amd_bus.c.
> These platforms snoop out the information by directly reading specific
> registers from the Northbridge and caching them via 'alloc_pci_root_info'.
>
> Later during boot processing when host bridges are discovered -
> 'pci_acpi_scan_root' - the kernel looks for their corresponding ACPI _PXM
> method - drivers/acpi/numa.c::acpi_get_node(). If the BIOS supplied a
> _PXM method then that node (proximity) value is associated. If the BIOS
> did not supply a _PXM method *and* the platform is AMD based, the
> fall-back cached values obtained directly from the Northbridge are used;
> otherwise, "NUMA_NO_NODE" is associated.
>
> There are a number of issues with this fall-back mechanism the most
> notable being that amd_bus.c extracts a 3-bit number from a CPU register
> and uses it as the node number. The node numbers used by Linux are
> logical and there's no reason they need to be identical to settings in the
> CPU registers. So if we have some node information obtained in the normal
> way (from _PXM, SLIT, SRAT, etc.) and some from amd_bus.c, there's no
> reason to believe they will be compatible.
>
> This patch warns when this situation occurs:
> pci_root PNP0A08:00: [Firmware Bug]: No _PXM; guessing node number 0
>
> [1] https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=72051
>
> Signed-off-by: Myron Stowe <myron.stowe@...hat.com>
> ---
>
> arch/x86/pci/acpi.c | 6 +++++-
> 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/pci/acpi.c b/arch/x86/pci/acpi.c
> index 01edac6..80c09ba 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/pci/acpi.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/pci/acpi.c
> @@ -489,8 +489,12 @@ struct pci_bus *pci_acpi_scan_root(struct acpi_pci_root *root)
> }
>
> node = acpi_get_node(device->handle);
> - if (node == NUMA_NO_NODE)
> + if (node == NUMA_NO_NODE) {
> node = x86_pci_root_bus_node(busnum);
> + if (node != NUMA_NO_NODE)
> + dev_info(&device->dev, FW_BUG "No _PXM; guessing node number %x\n",
Hmm, I'm not really convinced this message is user-friendly enough. Can
we be more descriptive here please?
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine.
--
--
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