Re: [PATCH v6] numa: make node_to_cpumask_map() NUMA_NO_NODE aware

From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
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
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6] numa: make node_to_cpumask_map() NUMA_NO_NODE aware
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2019 14:59:36 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190924125936.GR2349@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190924124325.GQ2349@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>

On Tue, Sep 24, 2019 at 02:43:25PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 24, 2019 at 02:25:00PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Tue 24-09-19 14:09:43, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> 
> > > We can push back and say we don't respect the specification because it
> > > is batshit insane ;-)
> > 
> > Here is my fingers crossed.
> > 
> > [...]
> > 
> > > Now granted; there's a number of virtual devices that really don't have
> > > a node affinity, but then, those are not hurt by forcing them onto a
> > > random node, they really don't do anything. Like:
> > 
> > Do you really consider a random node a better fix than simply living
> > with a more robust NUMA_NO_NODE which tells the actual state? Page
> > allocator would effectivelly use the local node in that case. Any code
> > using the cpumask will know that any of the online cpus are usable.
> 
> For the pmu devices? Yes, those 'devices' aren't actually used for
> anything other than sysfs entries.
> 
> Nothing else uses the struct device.

The below would get rid of the PMU and workqueue warnings with no
side-effects (the device isn't used for anything except sysfs).

I'm stuck in the device code for BDIs, I can't find a sane place to set
the node before it gets added, due to it using device_create_vargs().

---

diff --git a/kernel/events/core.c b/kernel/events/core.c
index 4f08b17d6426..2a64dcc3d70f 100644
--- a/kernel/events/core.c
+++ b/kernel/events/core.c
@@ -9965,6 +9965,7 @@ static int pmu_dev_alloc(struct pmu *pmu)
 	if (!pmu->dev)
 		goto out;
 
+	set_dev_node(pmu->dev, 0);
 	pmu->dev->groups = pmu->attr_groups;
 	device_initialize(pmu->dev);
 	ret = dev_set_name(pmu->dev, "%s", pmu->name);
diff --git a/kernel/workqueue.c b/kernel/workqueue.c
index bc2e09a8ea61..efafc4590bbe 100644
--- a/kernel/workqueue.c
+++ b/kernel/workqueue.c
@@ -5613,6 +5613,7 @@ int workqueue_sysfs_register(struct workqueue_struct *wq)
 	wq_dev->dev.bus = &wq_subsys;
 	wq_dev->dev.release = wq_device_release;
 	dev_set_name(&wq_dev->dev, "%s", wq->name);
+	set_dev_node(wq_dev, 0);
 
 	/*
 	 * unbound_attrs are created separately.  Suppress uevent until
