[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <877ezgap1b.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au>
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2017 14:34:08 +1000
From: Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
To: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>,
Gautham R Shenoy <ego@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Michael Neuling <mikey@...ling.org>,
Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <svaidy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Shilpasri G Bhat <shilpa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Akshay Adiga <akshay.adiga@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-pm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] powernv:idle: Move initialization of sibling pacas to pnv_alloc_idle_core_states
Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com> writes:
> On Fri, 7 Jul 2017 20:34:16 +0530
> Gautham R Shenoy <ego@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Jul 07, 2017 at 01:16:09AM +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
>> >
>> > Speaking of which... core_idle_state and thread_sibling_pacas are
>> > allocated with kmalloc_node... What happens if we take an SLB miss
>> > in the idle wakeup code on these guys? Nothing good I think. Perhaps
>> > we should put them into the pacas or somewhere in bolted memory.
>>
>> Yes, though the SLB miss hasn't yet been encountered in practise so
>> far!
>
> Considering it's a node-affine allocation, it may actually be possible
> to hit in practice on very large memory systems in practice.
You can boot with disable_1tb_segments on the kernel command line to
increase the change of hitting it.
cheers
Powered by blists - more mailing lists