Re: Off topic: Numactl "distance" wrong

[Andi Kleen]

On Tue, Apr 07, 2009 at 12:44:21AM -0700, David Rientjes wrote:
> 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).

Do you have an real-world example where this is wrong? 

> 
> 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.

The check heuristic handles this. I am not aware of a case where it really
fails and let's something really bogus through.

In general this thread seems to contain much more speculation than
facts.

-Andi

-- 
ak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx -- Speaking for myself only.
--
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/