[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <580485F5.9080207@huawei.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2016 16:04:05 +0800
From: "Leizhen (ThunderTown)" <thunder.leizhen@...wei.com>
To: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@...hat.com>,
Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>
CC: Andrew Jones <drjones@...hat.com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@...aro.org>,
main kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"Ard Biesheuvel" <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
Shannon Zhao <shannon.zhao@...aro.org>,
Wei Huang <wei@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: aarch64 ACPI boot regressed by commit 7ba5f605f3a0 ("arm64/numa:
remove the limitation that cpu0 must bind to node0")
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c
>> index d3f151cfd4a1..8507703dabe4 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c
>> @@ -544,6 +544,7 @@ acpi_map_gic_cpu_interface(struct acpi_madt_generic_interrupt *processor)
>> return;
>> }
>> bootcpu_valid = true;
>> + early_map_cpu_to_node(0, acpi_numa_get_nid(0, hwid));
>> return;
>> }
>>
>
> Anyway, your patch works with both the two-node NUMA configuration Drew suggested for testing, and with the single-node config that I originally used for the bisection. Therefore:
>
> Tested-by: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@...hat.com>
> Reported-by: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@...hat.com>
>
> Thank you very much for the quick bugfix! And, I think your patch (when you send it for real) should carry
I'm so sorry about this. My patch series prepared before ACPI NUMA upstreamed, and forgot considering it in later.
>
> Fixes: 7ba5f605f3a0d9495aad539eeb8346d726dfc183
>
> too, because it supplies the cpu#0<->node#xxx association that 7ba5f605f3a0 removed not just for DT, but also for ACPI.
>
> Cheers!
> Laszlo
>
> .
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists