Re: [PATCH 0/2] workqueue: fix a bug when numa mapping is changed

[Gu Zheng <guz.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>]

Hi Kame, TJ,

On 04/01/2015 04:30 PM, Kamezawa Hiroyuki wrote:

> On 2015/04/01 12:02, Tejun Heo wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 11:55:11AM +0900, Kamezawa Hiroyuki wrote:
>>> Now, hot-added cpus will have the lowest free cpu id.
>>>
>>> Because of this, in most of systems which has only cpu-hot-add, cpu-ids are always
>>> contiguous even after cpu hot add.
>>> In enterprise, this would be considered as imcompatibility.
>>>
>>> determining cpuid <-> lapicid at boot will make cpuids sparse. That may corrupt
>>> exisiting script or configuration/resource management software.
>>
>> Ugh... so, cpu number allocation on hot-add is part of userland
>> interface that we're locked into?
> 
> We checked most of RHEL7 packages and didn't find a problem yet.
> But, for examle, we know some performance test team's test program assumed contiguous
> cpuids and it failed. It was an easy case because we can ask them to fix the application
> but I guess there will be some amount of customers that cpuids are contiguous.
> 
>> Tying hotplug and id allocation
>> order together usually isn't a good idea.  What if the cpu up fails
>> while running the notifiers?  The ID is already allocated and the next
>> cpu being brought up will be after a hole anyway.  Is this even
>> actually gonna affect userland?
>>
> 
> Maybe. It's not fail-safe but....
> 
> In general, all kernel engineers (and skilled userland engineers) knows that
> cpuids cannot be always contiguous and cpuids/nodeids should be checked before
> running programs. I think most of engineers should be aware of that but many
> users have their own assumption :(
> 
> Basically, I don't have strong objections, you're right technically.
> 
> In summary...
>  - users should not assume cpuids are contiguous.
>  - all possible ids should be fixed at boot time.
>  - For uses, some clarification document should be somewhere in Documenatation.

Fine to me.

> 
> So, Gu-san
>  1) determine all possible ids at boot.
>  2) clarify cpuid/nodeid can have hole because of 1) in Documenation.
>  3) It would be good if other guys give us ack.

Also fine.
But before this going, could you please reconsider determining the ids when firstly
present (the implementation on this patchset)? 
Though it is not the perfect one in some words, but we can ignore the doubts that
mentioned above as the cpu/node hotplug is not frequent behaviours, and there seems
not anything harmful to us if we go this way.

Regards,
Gu

> 
> In future,
> I myself thinks naming system like udev for cpuid/numaid is necessary, at last.
> Can that renaming feature can be cgroup/namespace feature ? If possible,
> all container can have cpuids starting from 0.
> 
> Thanks,
> -Kame
> 
> .
>