[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <54F69C0B.6030502@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2015 14:45:47 +0900
From: Kamezawa Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
CC: Gu Zheng <guz.fnst@...fujitsu.com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<laijs@...fujitsu.com>, <isimatu.yasuaki@...fujitsu.com>,
<tangchen@...fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] workqueue: update numa affinity when node hotplug
On 2015/03/03 22:18, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello, Kame.
>
> On Tue, Mar 03, 2015 at 03:53:46PM +0900, Kamezawa Hiroyuki wrote:
>> relationship between proximity domain and lapic id doesn't change.
>> relationship between lapic-id and cpu-id changes.
>>
>> pxm <-> memory address : no change
>> pxm <-> lapicid : no change
>> pxm <-> node id : no change
>> lapicid <-> cpu id : change.
>
> So, we're changing the cpu ID to NUMA node mapping because current
> NUMA code is ignoring PXM for memoryless nodes? That's it?
>
For memory-less node case, yes.
Another problem is that lapicid <-> cpuid relationship is not persistent.
>>>> I personally thinks proper fix is building persistent cpu-id <-> lapicid relationship as
>>>> pxm does rather than creating band-aid.
>>>
>>> Oh if this is possible, I agree that's the right direction too.
>>>
>>
>> Implementation is a bit complicated now :(.
>
> Ah well, even then, the obviously right thing to do is updating NUMA
> code to always keep track of PXM information. We don't really want to
> pile NUMA hacks in random users of NUMA code.
>
We'd like to start from making apicid <-> cpuid persistent because memory-less
node case doesn't cause panic.
Gu-san, how do you think ?
Thanks,
-Kame
P.S.
Finally, I want something like udev for cpuid/numaid...
--
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