Re: Off topic: Numactl "distance" wrong

[David Rientjes]

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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/