[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <bf1757ca-6d41-87e7-53dd-56146eef5693@linux.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2024 10:06:06 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Christoph Lameter (Ampere)" <cl@...ux.com>
To: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
cc: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>, Viresh Kumar <vireshk@...nel.org>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com,
Matteo.Carlini@....com, Valentin.Schneider@....com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, anshuman.khandual@....com,
Eric Mackay <eric.mackay@...cle.com>, dave.kleikamp@...cle.com,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux@...linux.org.uk, robin.murphy@....com,
vanshikonda@...amperecomputing.com, yang@...amperecomputing.com,
Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] ARM64: Dynamically allocate cpumasks and increase
supported CPUs to 512
On Mon, 11 Mar 2024, Christoph Lameter (Ampere) wrote:
> This could be an issue in the ARM64 arch code itself where there maybe an
> assumption elsewhere that a cpumask can always store up to NR_CPU cpus and
> not only nr_cpu_ids as OFFSTACK does.
>
> How can I exercise the opp driver in order to recreate the problem?
>
> I assume the opp driver is ARM specific? x86 defaults to OFFSTACK so if there
> is an issue with OFFSTACK in opp then it should fail with kernel default
> configuration on that platform.
I checked the ARM64 arch sources use of NR_CPUS and its all fine.
Also verified in my testing logs that CONFIG_PM_OPP was set in all tests.
No warnings in the kernel log during those tests.
How to reproduce this?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists