From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <SRS0=kV/c=XT=lists.ozlabs.org=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@kernel.org>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on
	aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=3.0 tests=MAILING_LIST_MULTI,
	SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
	version=3.4.0
Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99])
	by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3C42C4320D
	for <linuxppc-dev@archiver.kernel.org>; Tue, 24 Sep 2019 07:51:43 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [203.11.71.2])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 16E1A20673
	for <linuxppc-dev@archiver.kernel.org>; Tue, 24 Sep 2019 07:51:42 +0000 (UTC)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 16E1A20673
Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org
Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org
Received: from bilbo.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::3])
	by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46ctgH6fhHzDqSh
	for <linuxppc-dev@archiver.kernel.org>; Tue, 24 Sep 2019 17:51:39 +1000 (AEST)
Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org;
 spf=softfail (mailfrom) smtp.mailfrom=kernel.org
 (client-ip=195.135.220.15; helo=mx1.suse.de; envelope-from=mhocko@kernel.org;
 receiver=<UNKNOWN>)
Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org;
 dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org
Received: from mx1.suse.de (mx2.suse.de [195.135.220.15])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46ctb65bbLzDqS5
 for <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>; Tue, 24 Sep 2019 17:48:01 +1000 (AEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de
Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.220.254])
 by mx1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8B0CAFA5;
 Tue, 24 Sep 2019 07:47:56 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2019 09:47:51 +0200
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6] numa: make node_to_cpumask_map() NUMA_NO_NODE aware
Message-ID: <20190924074751.GB23050@dhcp22.suse.cz>
References: <1568724534-146242-1-git-send-email-linyunsheng@huawei.com>
 <20190923151519.GE2369@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20190923152856.GB17206@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <20190923154852.GG2369@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20190923165235.GD17206@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <20190923203410.GI2369@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20190923203410.GI2369@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List <linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/options/linuxppc-dev>,
 <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
List-Help: <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev>,
 <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=subscribe>
Cc: dalias@libc.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, catalin.marinas@arm.com,
 dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com,
 jiaxun.yang@flygoat.com, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, mwb@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
 paulus@samba.org, hpa@zytor.com, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, chenhc@lemote.com,
 will@kernel.org, cai@lca.pw, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
 ysato@users.sourceforge.jp, x86@kernel.org,
 Yunsheng Lin <linyunsheng@huawei.com>, rppt@linux.ibm.com,
 borntraeger@de.ibm.com, dledford@redhat.com, mingo@redhat.com,
 jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com, jhogan@kernel.org, mattst88@gmail.com,
 len.brown@intel.com, gor@linux.ibm.com, anshuman.khandual@arm.com,
 gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, bp@alien8.de, luto@kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de,
 naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
 rth@twiddle.net, axboe@kernel.dk, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
 linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ralf@linux-mips.org, tbogendoerfer@suse.de,
 paul.burton@mips.com, linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org, rafael@kernel.org,
 ink@jurassic.park.msu.ru, akpm@linux-foundation.org, robin.murphy@arm.com,
 davem@davemloft.net
Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org
Sender: "Linuxppc-dev"
 <linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org>

On Mon 23-09-19 22:34:10, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 06:52:35PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
[...]
> > I even the
> > ACPI standard is considering this optional. Yunsheng Lin has referred to
> > the specific part of the standard in one of the earlier discussions.
> > Trying to guess the node affinity is worse than providing all CPUs IMHO.
> 
> I'm saying the ACPI standard is wrong.

Even if you were right on this the reality is that a HW is likely to
follow that standard and we cannot rule out NUMA_NO_NODE being
specified. As of now we would access beyond the defined array and that
is clearly a bug.

Let's assume that this is really a bug for a moment. What are you going
to do about that? BUG_ON? I do not really see any solution besides to either
provide something sensible or BUG_ON. If you are worried about a
conditional then this should be pretty easy to solve by starting the
array at -1 index and associate it with the online cpu mask.
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs