Re: [tip:sched/core] x86/numa: Allow specifying node_distance() for numa=fake

[David Rientjes]

On Wed, 9 May 2012, tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra wrote:

> Commit-ID:  94c0dd3278dd3eae52eabf0fb77d472d0dd3e373
> Gitweb:     http://git.kernel.org/tip/94c0dd3278dd3eae52eabf0fb77d472d0dd3e373
> Author:     Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@xxxxxxxxx>
> AuthorDate: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 19:04:17 +0200
> Committer:  Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>
> CommitDate: Wed, 9 May 2012 13:28:59 +0200
> 
> x86/numa: Allow specifying node_distance() for numa=fake
> 
> Allows emulating more interesting NUMA configurations like a quad
> socket AMD Magny-Cour:
> 
>  "numa=fake=8:10,16,16,22,16,22,16,22,
>               16,10,22,16,22,16,22,16,
>               16,22,10,16,16,22,16,22,
>               22,16,16,10,22,16,22,16,
>               16,22,16,22,10,16,16,22,
>               22,16,22,16,16,10,22,16,
>               16,22,16,22,16,22,10,16,
>               22,16,22,16,22,16,16,10"
> 
> Which has a non-fully-connected topology.
> 

I like this support and I'm pretty sure you used it to reproduce my 
problems with sched/numa locally, but I think it would be better to 
seperate it out as a different parameter such as slit=fake so that we can 
still use it to fake the SLIT of our NUMA machines without requiring 
numa=fake which provides no guarantees to break the nodes along physical 
boundaries.

So without seperating it out into slit=fake, we can't change this 
information without changing the SLIT itself and that makes debugging 
harder.
--
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/