From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: Ganapatrao Kulkarni <gklkml16@gmail.com>
Cc: Ganapatrao Kulkarni <ganapatrao.kulkarni@cavium.com>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
tiantao6@huawei.com, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: fd3e45436660 ("ACPI / NUMA: ia64: Parse all entries of SRAT memory affinity table")
Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 14:56:11 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180509125611.GT32366@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKTKpr5uPuZUHBnQtDwpGA_d=WTx_5O2SF_+WStO6OMVNe77QQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed 09-05-18 18:07:16, Ganapatrao Kulkarni wrote:
> Hi Michal
>
>
> On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 5:54 PM, Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> wrote:
> > On Wed 11-04-18 12:48:32, Michal Hocko wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >> my attention was brought to the %subj commit and either I am missing
> >> something or the patch is quite dubious. What is it actually trying to
> >> fix? If a BIOS/FW provides more memblocks than the limit then we would
> >> get misleading numa topology (numactl -H output) but is the situation
> >> much better with it applied? Numa init code will refuse to init more
> >> memblocks than the limit and falls back to dummy_numa_init (AFAICS)
> >> which will break the topology again and numactl -H will have a
> >> misleading output anyway.
>
> IIRC, the MEMBLOCK beyond max limit getting dropped from visible
> memory(partial drop from a node).
> this patch removed any upper limit on memblocks and allowed to parse
> all entries of SRAT.
Yeah I've understood that much. My question is, however, why do we care
about parsing the NUMA topology when we fallback into a single NUMA node
anyway? Or do I misunderstand the code? I do not have any platform with
that many memblocks.
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-05-09 12:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-04-11 10:48 fd3e45436660 ("ACPI / NUMA: ia64: Parse all entries of SRAT memory affinity table") Michal Hocko
2018-05-09 12:24 ` Michal Hocko
2018-05-09 12:37 ` Ganapatrao Kulkarni
2018-05-09 12:56 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2018-05-10 2:57 ` Ganapatrao Kulkarni
2018-05-10 7:30 ` Michal Hocko
2018-05-10 8:06 ` Ganapatrao Kulkarni
2018-05-10 8:22 ` Michal Hocko
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20180509125611.GT32366@dhcp22.suse.cz \
--to=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=ganapatrao.kulkarni@cavium.com \
--cc=gklkml16@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com \
--cc=tiantao6@huawei.com \
--cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.