Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751992AbdDIDMo (ORCPT ); Sat, 8 Apr 2017 23:12:44 -0400 Received: from mail-oi0-f65.google.com ([209.85.218.65]:36319 "EHLO mail-oi0-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751348AbdDIDMf (ORCPT ); Sat, 8 Apr 2017 23:12:35 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20170406184838.z4pa4j33z2rp4mrg@pd.tnic> References: <20170314030801.13656-1-richard.weiyang@gmail.com> <20170314030801.13656-2-richard.weiyang@gmail.com> <20170406124459.dwn5zhpr2xqg3lqm@node.shutemov.name> <20170406145937.docce7sa5tuqyon4@pd.tnic> <20170406154216.a4um6ftjyia5wxya@node.shutemov.name> <20170406180113.hvcydzrjldodosfo@pd.tnic> <20170406182147.mwifrukq7ylczi6i@node.shutemov.name> <20170406184838.z4pa4j33z2rp4mrg@pd.tnic> From: Wei Yang Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2017 11:12:14 +0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [Patch V2 2/2] x86/mm/numa: remove the numa_nodemask_from_meminfo() To: Borislav Petkov Cc: "Kirill A. Shutemov" , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , Tejun Heo , Linux Kernel Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1940 Lines: 61 On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 2:48 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Thu, Apr 06, 2017 at 09:21:47PM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: >> > Long story short, something as trivial as this helps here: >> >> Yep. Works for me. >> >> Reported-and-tested-by: Kirill A. Shutemov > > Thanks. > > Now, I'd really like to have more test coverage and be sure this > "cleanup" doesn't break anything else so Wei, please grab tip/master, > apply the oneliner from two messages ago, take Kirill's qemu cmdline > and run all fake numa scenarios you can think of to make sure your > cleanup doesn't break anything else. > Oops, sorry to bring in the regression with my cleanup. I haven't noticed there is a kernel command line "numa=fake", which is the cause of the crash I think. So from my understanding, I am goting to do these tests: 1. all fake numa scenarios with Kirill's qemu command line 2. Real numa scenarios with following qemu command option 3. Baremetal One more question, on the baremetal mathine, I can't change the numa configuration, so there would be only one case. Do you have some specific requirement? Well, if I missed something, just let me know :-) > Qemu can emulate real numa too, for example you can boot with: > > -smp 64 \ > -numa node,nodeid=0,cpus=1-8 \ > -numa node,nodeid=1,cpus=9-16 \ > -numa node,nodeid=2,cpus=17-24 \ > -numa node,nodeid=3,cpus=25-32 \ > -numa node,nodeid=4,cpus=0 \ > -numa node,nodeid=4,cpus=33-39 \ > -numa node,nodeid=5,cpus=40-47 \ > -numa node,nodeid=6,cpus=48-55 \ > -numa node,nodeid=7,cpus=56-63 > > after configuring the kernel accordingly. > > Then, test baremetal too. > > numa_emulation() should give you an idea about possible options > numa=fake takes. Documentation/x86/x86_64/boot-options.txt has some > (all?) too. > > Thanks. > > -- > Regards/Gruss, > Boris. > > Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.