Received: by 10.223.164.202 with SMTP id h10csp4695223wrb; Wed, 29 Nov 2017 10:18:15 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMaKAPmlgiGH4K7htK2Xot8iCnEdcZ11vG2PvO+6FfGvgVBokclQu5ZnjgqdQjPP6Cfjaa0R X-Received: by 10.84.235.70 with SMTP id g6mr3641684plt.87.1511979495684; Wed, 29 Nov 2017 10:18:15 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1511979495; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=0+3y+Pvf8HzxjOBmsjEC7FFMIH/LFuWWa8Mra8p4YGNIkQp9JSits0EwudWVYVTNgd fqVxsDrZXZV5i31x1H9KfhQl1sdJD2ra2LrdQrSr+ykeOS0EFTNFF3bQhoJK5SX4I5nP UO61Ea4kZp7sQoblOsGmDT5bpK2tBAIk+TtZ/J1IINrAYPCvVs3O+i7NHgIVdmUEytte b6vWHJEvmIl/qHiJtijavjPCyWC68C7duh6OgtpWU9H/6pEsgGIii0xSgKd46otqWuVu vU/vrXXzs5RUf3PBUgXAC4wbWP7AnjsKjkxIYYNhaT+X0YEg8Wc7NPfPeK0iVc0jEvWb WQJw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to :references:subject:cc:to:mime-version:user-agent:from:date :message-id:arc-authentication-results; bh=Q6TubC0zG9uHIOcuB2KcI73ZXQnkpwGpKCt44+eiK64=; b=KkAJ66SP3IfDIzjzCLB1cCfodh/B5v6WoXDgScn5sYjTi2maHwiKoHMY4jpO7OYfkt dihmifYL+GWEhb93TfyCPM4q+6Fgm/bAbZ4so8k2NGvW09Smfb2RVh3aTSeUWq9GFcak DVSg09y/hc/PhQcntyEJmhQWLIbeY8u9vMaJuUQxDkDCjFeEwgI0lJOSy+HESBICdq7n ds6grIQ7A3C8EMVLXq007gbWlSaleOgPf7kOPGoUArjrjzuWiHVJkeUaOt3EYpl7Fy4M JwFkVqPbYQH7hFcOJEppK3FSg7WuJtoXnZw8wwvNmIV61k7XPj6dnE0SDfZX0feQ56I8 bgVQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id f35si1606818plh.806.2017.11.29.10.18.05; Wed, 29 Nov 2017 10:18:15 -0800 (PST) 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; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932818AbdK2NrD (ORCPT + 70 others); Wed, 29 Nov 2017 08:47:03 -0500 Received: from szxga05-in.huawei.com ([45.249.212.191]:11473 "EHLO szxga05-in.huawei.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753530AbdK2NrA (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Nov 2017 08:47:00 -0500 Received: from 172.30.72.58 (EHLO DGGEMS405-HUB.china.huawei.com) ([172.30.72.58]) by dggrg05-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.4.6-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id DLR90943; Wed, 29 Nov 2017 21:44:54 +0800 (CST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (10.177.29.68) by DGGEMS405-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.205) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.361.1; Wed, 29 Nov 2017 21:44:47 +0800 Message-ID: <5A1EB9B1.9000907@huawei.com> Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2017 21:44:17 +0800 From: zhong jiang User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120428 Thunderbird/12.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Michal Hocko CC: , , , , , , , , , , Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/numa: move setting parse numa node to num_add_memblk References: <1511946807-22024-1-git-send-email-zhongjiang@huawei.com> <20171129120328.dfbr26o4wsjpwct3@dhcp22.suse.cz> <5A1EAAF5.4040602@huawei.com> <20171129130158.hji24remijkaoydb@dhcp22.suse.cz> <5A1EB57B.2080101@huawei.com> <20171129133355.ybbhzpqhmjreyofi@dhcp22.suse.cz> In-Reply-To: <20171129133355.ybbhzpqhmjreyofi@dhcp22.suse.cz> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.177.29.68] X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected X-Mirapoint-Virus-RAPID-Raw: score=unknown(0), refid=str=0001.0A020204.5A1EB9D7.002E,ss=1,re=0.000,recu=0.000,reip=0.000,cl=1,cld=1,fgs=0, ip=0.0.0.0, so=2014-11-16 11:51:01, dmn=2013-03-21 17:37:32 X-Mirapoint-Loop-Id: e5351a28e87055c1951da47c8272cb8d Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2017/11/29 21:33, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Wed 29-11-17 21:26:19, zhong jiang wrote: >> On 2017/11/29 21:01, Michal Hocko wrote: >>> On Wed 29-11-17 20:41:25, zhong jiang wrote: >>>> On 2017/11/29 20:03, Michal Hocko wrote: >>>>> On Wed 29-11-17 17:13:27, zhong jiang wrote: >>>>>> Currently, Arm64 and x86 use the common code wehn parsing numa node >>>>>> in a acpi way. The arm64 will set the parsed node in numa_add_memblk, >>>>>> but the x86 is not set in that , then it will result in the repeatly >>>>>> setting. And the parsed node maybe is unreasonable to the system. >>>>>> >>>>>> we would better not set it although it also still works. because the >>>>>> parsed node is unresonable. so we should skip related operate in this >>>>>> node. This patch just set node in various architecture individually. >>>>>> it is no functional change. >>>>> I really have hard time to understand what you try to say above. Could >>>>> you start by the problem description and then how you are addressing it? >>>> I am so sorry for that. I will make the issue clear. >>>> >>>> Arm64 get numa information through acpi. The code flow is as follows. >>>> >>>> arm64_acpi_numa_init >>>> acpi_parse_memory_affinity >>>> acpi_numa_memory_affinity_init >>>> numa_add_memblk(nid, start, end); //it will set node to numa_nodes_parsed successfully. >>>> node_set(node, numa_nodes_parsed); // numa_add_memblk had set that. it will repeat. >>>> >>>> the root cause is that X86 parse numa also go through above code. and arch-related >>>> numa_add_memblk is not set the parsed node to numa_nodes_parsed. it need >>>> additional node_set(node, numa_parsed) to handle. therefore, the issue will be introduced. >>>> >>> No it is not much more clear. I would have to go and re-study the whole >>> code flow to see what you mean here. So you could simply state what _the >>> issue_ is? How can user observe it and what are the consequences? >> The patch do not fix a real issue. it is a cleanup. >> because the acpi code is public, I find they are messy between >> Arch64 and X86 when parsing numa message . therefore, I try to >> make the code more clear between them. > So make this explicit in the changelog. Your previous wording sounded > like there is a _problem_ in the code. > :-[ please take some time to check. if it works. I will resend v2 with detailed changelog. Thanks zhongjiang From 1585425299217537826@xxx Wed Nov 29 18:16:28 +0000 2017 X-GM-THRID: 1585391832743441876 X-Gmail-Labels: Inbox,Category Forums,HistoricalUnread