Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1752831AbdHKJPe (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Fri, 11 Aug 2017 05:15:34 -0400
Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([65.50.211.133]:37674 "EHLO
        bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1751521AbdHKJPc (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Fri, 11 Aug 2017 05:15:32 -0400
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2017 11:15:27 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Suravee Suthikulpanit <Suravee.Suthikulpanit@amd.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@redhat.com, bp@suse.de
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] sched/topology: Introduce NUMA identity node sched
 domain
Message-ID: <20170811091527.wyngvvq2dy3yzik2@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <1502378452-6632-1-git-send-email-suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com>
 <20170810164149.2rkkp55km5cxcarg@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <ab9866af-f88b-91d8-0e48-423dbcb00ae9@amd.com>
 <f1eed7cb-ea9f-08c4-153d-36006ffc033c@amd.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <f1eed7cb-ea9f-08c4-153d-36006ffc033c@amd.com>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170609 (1.8.3)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1533
Lines: 36

On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 12:58:22PM +0700, Suravee Suthikulpanit wrote:
> 
> 
> On 8/11/17 11:57, Suravee Suthikulpanit wrote:
> > 
> > > > [...]
> > > > @@ -1445,9 +1448,24 @@ void sched_init_numa(void)
> > > >          tl[i] = sched_domain_topology[i];
> > > > 
> > > >      /*
> > > > +     * Ignore the NUMA identity level if it has the same cpumask
> > > > +     * as previous level. This is the case for:
> > > > +     *   - System with last-level-cache (MC) sched domain span a NUMA node.
> > > > +     *   - System with DIE sched domain span a NUMA node.
> > > > +     *
> > > > +     * Assume all NUMA nodes are identical, so only check node 0.
> > > > +     */
> > > > +    if (!cpumask_equal(sched_domains_numa_masks[0][0], tl[i-1].mask(0)))
> > > > +        tl[i++] = (struct sched_domain_topology_level){
> > > > +            .mask = sd_numa_mask,
> > > > +            .numa_level = 0,
> > > > +            SD_INIT_NAME(NODE)
> > > > +        };
> > > 
> > > So what you've forgotten to mention is that for those systems where the
> > > LLC == NODE this now superfluous level gets removed by the degenerate
> > > code. Have you verified that does the right thing?
> > 
> > Let me check with that one and get back.
> 
> Actually, it is not removed by the degenerate code. That is what this logic
> is for. It checks for LCC == NODE or DIE == NODE before setting up the NODE
> sched level. I can update the comment. This has also been tested on system
> w/ LLC == NODE.

Why does the degenerate code fail to remove things?