[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200703125823.GA26243@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2020 18:28:23 +0530
From: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
Cc: Michal Such?nek <msuchanek@...e.de>,
David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
Gautham R Shenoy <ego@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Satheesh Rajendran <sathnaga@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, Christopher Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/3] mm/page_alloc: Keep memoryless cpuless node 0
offline
* Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org> [2020-07-03 12:59:44]:
> > Honestly, I do not have any idea. I've traced it down to
> > Author: Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>
> > Date: Tue Jan 11 15:35:48 2005 -0800
> >
> > [PATCH] x86_64: Fix ACPI SRAT NUMA parsing
> >
> > Fix fallout from the recent nodemask_t changes. The node ids assigned
> > in the SRAT parser were off by one.
> >
> > I added a new first_unset_node() function to nodemask.h to allocate
> > IDs sanely.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>
> > Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org>
> >
> > which doesn't really tell all that much. The historical baggage and a
> > long term behavior which is not really trivial to fix I suspect.
>
> Thinking about this some more, this logic makes some sense afterall.
> Especially in the world without memory hotplug which was very likely the
> case back then. It is much better to have compact node mask rather than
> sparse one. After all node numbers shouldn't really matter as long as
> you have a clear mapping to the HW. I am not sure we export that
> information (except for the kernel ring buffer) though.
>
> The memory hotplug changes that somehow because you can hotremove numa
> nodes and therefore make the nodemask sparse but that is not a common
> case. I am not sure what would happen if a completely new node was added
> and its corresponding node was already used by the renumbered one
> though. It would likely conflate the two I am afraid. But I am not sure
> this is really possible with x86 and a lack of a bug report would
> suggest that nobody is doing that at least.
>
JFYI,
Satheesh copied in this mailchain had opened a bug a year on crash with vcpu
hotplug on memoryless node.
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=202187
--
Thanks and Regards
Srikar Dronamraju
Powered by blists - more mailing lists