Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753518AbcJDAsu (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Oct 2016 20:48:50 -0400 Received: from mail-pf0-f174.google.com ([209.85.192.174]:33822 "EHLO mail-pf0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751399AbcJDAsr (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Oct 2016 20:48:47 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/5] powerpc/mm: restore top-down allocation when using movable_node To: Reza Arbab , Benjamin Herrenschmidt References: <1474828616-16608-1-git-send-email-arbab@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1474828616-16608-5-git-send-email-arbab@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1474924351.2857.255.camel@kernel.crashing.org> <20160927001413.o72fqpfsnsxpu5qq@arbab-laptop> Cc: Michael Ellerman , Paul Mackerras , Rob Herring , Frank Rowand , Jonathan Corbet , Andrew Morton , Bharata B Rao , Nathan Fontenot , Stewart Smith , Alistair Popple , "Aneesh Kumar K.V" , linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org From: Balbir Singh Message-ID: Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2016 11:48:30 +1100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20160927001413.o72fqpfsnsxpu5qq@arbab-laptop> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 829 Lines: 15 On 27/09/16 10:14, Reza Arbab wrote: > On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 07:12:31AM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: >> In any case, if the memory hasn't been hotplug, this shouldn't be necessary as we shouldn't be considering it for allocation. > > Right. To be clear, the background info I put in the commit log refers to x86, where the SRAT can describe movable nodes which exist at boot. They're trying to avoid allocations from those nodes before they've been identified. > > On power, movable nodes can only exist via hotplug, so that scenario can't happen. We can immediately go back to top-down allocation. That is the missing call being added in the patch. > Can we fix cmdline_parse_movable_node() to do the right thing? I suspect that code is heavily x86 only in the sense that no other arch needs it. Balbir Singh.