Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Thu, 9 Jan 2020 10:52:28 +0000
From:   Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com>
To:     Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>
Cc:     "Zengtao (B)" <prime.zeng@hisilicon.com>,
        Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
        Linuxarm <linuxarm@huawei.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpu-topology: warn if NUMA configurations conflicts with
 lower layer
Message-ID: <20200109105228.GB10914@e105550-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
References: <1577088979-8545-1-git-send-email-prime.zeng@hisilicon.com>
 <20191231164051.GA4864@bogus>
 <678F3D1BB717D949B966B68EAEB446ED340AE1D3@dggemm526-mbx.china.huawei.com>
 <20200102112955.GC4864@bogus>
 <678F3D1BB717D949B966B68EAEB446ED340AEB67@dggemm526-mbx.china.huawei.com>
 <c43342d0-7e4d-3be0-0fe1-8d802b0d7065@arm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <c43342d0-7e4d-3be0-0fe1-8d802b0d7065@arm.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Jan 02, 2020 at 01:22:19PM +0000, Valentin Schneider wrote:
> On 02/01/2020 12:47, Zengtao (B) wrote:
> >>
> >> As I said, wrong configurations need to be detected when generating
> >> DT/ACPI if possible. The above will print warning on systems with NUMA
> >> within package.
> >>
> >> NUMA:  0-7, 8-15
> >> core_siblings:   0-15
> >>
> >> The above is the example where the die has 16 CPUs and 2 NUMA nodes
> >> within a package, your change throws error to the above config which is
> >> wrong.
> >>
> > From your example, the core 7 and core 8 has got different LLC but the same Low
> > Level cache?
> 
> AFAIA what matters here is memory controllers, less so LLCs. Cores within
> a single die could have private LLCs and separate memory controllers, or
> shared LLC and separate memory controllers.

Don't confuse cache boundaries, packages and nodes :-)

core_siblings are cpus in the same package and doesn't say anything
about cache boundaries. It is not given that there is sched_domain that
matches the core_sibling span.

The MC sched_domain is supposed to match the LLC span which might
different for core_siblings. So the about example should be valid for a
NUMA-in-package system with one package containing two nodes.

Morten