[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160818160437.GA21343@e104818-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 17:04:37 +0100
From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
To: zhongjiang <zhongjiang@...wei.com>
Cc: mark.rutland@....com, robh+dt@...nel.org, will.deacon@....com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
Ganapatrao Kulkarni <gkulkarni@...iumnetworks.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm, numa: boot cpu should bound to the node0 when
node_off enable
On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 09:09:26PM +0800, zhongjiang wrote:
> At present, boot cpu will bound to a node from device tree when node_off enable.
> if the node is not initialization, it will lead to a following problem.
>
> next_zones_zonelist+0x18/0x80
> __build_all_zonelists+0x1e0/0x288
> build_all_zonelists_init+0x10/0x1c
> build_all_zonelists+0x114/0x128
> start_kernel+0x1a0/0x414
I think this "problem" is missing a lot of information. Is this supposed
to be a kernel panic?
> The patch fix it by fallback to node 0. therefore, the cpu will bound to the node
> correctly.
>
> Signed-off-by: zhongjiang <zhongjiang@...wei.com>
> ---
> arch/arm64/mm/numa.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c b/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c
> index 4dcd7d6..1f8f5da 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c
> @@ -119,7 +119,7 @@ void numa_store_cpu_info(unsigned int cpu)
> void __init early_map_cpu_to_node(unsigned int cpu, int nid)
> {
> /* fallback to node 0 */
> - if (nid < 0 || nid >= MAX_NUMNODES)
> + if (nid < 0 || nid >= MAX_NUMNODES || numa_off)
> nid = 0;
>
> cpu_to_node_map[cpu] = nid;
The patch looks fine (slight inconsistence from the map_cpu_to_node()
callers but I guess we don't want to expose numa_off outside this file).
I would however like to see an Ack from Ganapat (cc'ed).
--
Catalin
Powered by blists - more mailing lists