From: "Verma, Vishal L" <email@example.com>
To: "firstname.lastname@example.org" <email@example.com>
Cc: "Williams, Dan J" <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] mm/memory_hotplug: refrain from adding memory into an impossible node
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2020 16:13:35 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <email@example.com> (raw)
On Thu, 2020-04-16 at 08:19 +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Wed 15-04-20 20:32:00, Verma, Vishal L wrote:
> > >
> > > I really do not like this. Why should we try to be clever and change the
> > > node id requested by the caller? I would just stick with node_possible
> > > check and be done with this.
> > Hi Michal,
> > Being clever allows us to still use the memory even if it is in a non-
> > optimal configuration. Failing here leaves the user no path to add this
> > memory until the firmware is fixed. It is the tradeoff between some
> > usability vs. how loud we want to be for the failure.
> Doing that papers over something that is clearly a FW issue and makes
> it "my performance is suboptimal" deal with it OS problem. Really, is
> this something we have to care about. Your changelog talks about a Qemu
> misconfiguration which is trivial to fix. Has this ever been observed
> with a real HW?
Well - more of a qemu bug I think - I can share the details, but it just
looked like it was producing a bogus SRAT. I think it is plausible that
such a firmware bug can happen out in the wild. The NFIT tables would
just need to reference a 'proximity domain' that the SRAT hasn't
previously described, and hotplug will happily go add memory from the
NFIT and the backing node related data structures would be missing.
I'm not too opposed to erroring out, so long as we are ok with the fact
that we will leave some memory stranded until there's a firmware fix.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-04-16 16:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-04-14 23:58 [PATCH v3] mm/memory_hotplug: refrain from adding memory into an impossible node Vishal Verma
2020-04-15 7:39 ` David Hildenbrand
2020-04-15 7:44 ` David Hildenbrand
2020-04-15 10:43 ` Michal Hocko
2020-04-15 20:32 ` Verma, Vishal L
2020-04-16 6:19 ` Michal Hocko
2020-04-16 16:13 ` Verma, Vishal L [this message]
2020-04-16 16:16 ` David Hildenbrand
2020-04-16 16:18 ` Verma, Vishal L
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:
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
* 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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).