Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753461AbZDGHot (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Apr 2009 03:44:49 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752040AbZDGHoh (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Apr 2009 03:44:37 -0400 Received: from smtp-out.google.com ([216.239.45.13]:12132 "EHLO smtp-out.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751256AbZDGHoh (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Apr 2009 03:44:37 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=beta; d=google.com; c=nofws; q=dns; h=date:from:x-x-sender:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:message-id: references:user-agent:mime-version:content-type:x-system-of-record; b=kuobiNueV3DkDdLPhUoeSEAcnY6Ywrihvyo9HfHij4yMv3ImUiGCIT6t6s8GDsAE+ xI9Pcx4gRPh5+Xg0ACibQ== Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2009 00:44:21 -0700 (PDT) From: David Rientjes X-X-Sender: rientjes@chino.kir.corp.google.com To: Andi Kleen cc: Brice Goglin , KOSAKI Motohiro , Yinghai Lu , Chris Worley , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Off topic: Numactl "distance" wrong In-Reply-To: <20090407070530.GJ17934@one.firstfloor.org> Message-ID: References: <86802c440904031448yc6d499ckd9cb969ce136f477@mail.gmail.com> <87r609jtc2.fsf@basil.nowhere.org> <20090407111539.F0F5.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> <49DAF003.1070605@inria.fr> <20090407070530.GJ17934@one.firstfloor.org> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (DEB 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-System-Of-Record: true Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1356 Lines: 38 On Tue, 7 Apr 2009, Andi Kleen wrote: > I'm not aware of any that does. In general applications usually > only use the bare basics of NUMA API (if at all), the fancy stuff tends > to be more slideware. > > If it's true then the correct place would be to fix the BIOS. > We already verify that each node has local distance to itself and that its distance to any other node is greater than local when determining whether the SLIT is valid. It would also be possible to verify that the distance between two localities is described consistently in the table (like in the following patch). I do think it would be helpful to add an acpi=noslit option, however, that would disable parsing the SLIT if it is known to incorrectly describe the physical topology of the system. --- diff --git a/drivers/acpi/numa.c b/drivers/acpi/numa.c --- a/drivers/acpi/numa.c +++ b/drivers/acpi/numa.c @@ -172,6 +172,8 @@ static __init int slit_valid(struct acpi_table_slit *slit) return 0; } else if (val <= LOCAL_DISTANCE) return 0; + if (val != slit->entry[d*j + i]) + return 0; } } return 1; -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/