Re: sched: CPU #1's llc-sibling CPU #0 is not on the same node!

[Tang Chen]

On 03/01/2013 03:43 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote:
> Please check attached patches.
>
> Plan A. revert all 8 patches:
>      revert_movablemem_map.patch
>
> Plan B. fix movablemem_map:
>      kill_max_low_pfn_mapped.patch and fix_movablemem_map.patch
>
> fix_movablemem_map.patch is too risky, and need more test.

Hi Yinghai,

In your Plan B, you allocated pgdat on local node, right ?

-    nd_pa = memblock_alloc_try_nid(nd_size, SMP_CACHE_BYTES, nid);
+    nd_pa = memblock_find_in_range_node(start, end, nd_size,
+                     SMP_CACHE_BYTES, nid);  ---------------- Here, 
right ?

Without movablemem_map, pgdat will be allocated successfully on local 
node, right ?

If so, this will prevent node hot-plug, because as mentioned by 
Kamezawa, there is
no way to ensure pgdat is not used by others on stack.

I do hope you can stop putting pgdat and zone on local node for now. And 
improve it
in the future.

And I also hope you can apply my revert SRAT patch first, and then do 
your work.
It will seem more clean to me.

Thanks. :)
--
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/