linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	x86@kernel.org, "Peter Zijlstra" <peterz@infradead.org>,
	"Borislav Petkov" <bp@alien8.de>,
	"Charles (Chas) Williams" <ciwillia@brocade.com>,
	"M. Vefa Bicakci" <m.v.b@runbox.com>,
	"Alok Kataria" <akataria@vmware.com>,
	xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>,
	"Juergen Groß" <jgross@suse.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/smpboot: Make logical package management more robust
Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2016 22:23:45 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <60e7a807-27fb-f666-270a-9512804deae8@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1612102012060.18281@nanos>



On 12/10/2016 02:13 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Sat, 10 Dec 2016, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> On Fri, 9 Dec 2016, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
>>> On 12/09/2016 06:02 PM, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
>>>> On 12/09/2016 05:06 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, 8 Dec 2016, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Boris, can you please verify if that makes the
>>>>> topology_update_package_map() call which you placed into the Xen cpu
>>>>> starting code obsolete ?
>>>>
>>>> Will do. I did test your patch but without removing
>>>> topology_update_package_map() call. It complained about package IDs
>>>> being wrong, but that's expected until I fix Xen part.
>>>
>>> Ignore my statement about earlier testing --- it was all on single-node
>>> machines.
>>>
>>> Something is broken with multi-node on Intel, but failure modes are different.
>>> Prior to this patch build_sched_domain() reports an error and pretty soon we
>>> crash in scheduler (don't remember off the top of my head). With patch applied
>>> I crash mush later, when one of the drivers does kmalloc_node(..,
>>> cpu_to_node(cpu)) and cpu_to_node() returns 1, which should never happen
>>> ("x86: Booted up 1 node, 32 CPUs" is reported, for example).
>>
>> Hmm. But the cpu_to_node() association is unrelated to the logical package
>> management.
>
> Just came to my mind after hitting send. We had the whole persistent cpuid
> to nodeid association work merged in 4.9. So that might be related.


Yes, that's exactly the reason.

It uses _PXM to set nodeID and _PXM is exposed to dom0 (which is a 
privileged PV guest).

Re: you previous message: after I "fix" the problem above,  I see
     pr_info("Max logical packages: %u\n", __max_logical_packages);
but no
     pr_warn(CPU %u Converting physical %u to logical package %u\n", ...)

with or without topology_update_package_map() in 
arch/x86/xen/smp.c:cpu_bringup()


-boris

  reply	other threads:[~2016-12-11  3:25 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-12-08  9:04 [PATCH] x86/smpboot: Make logical package management more robust Thomas Gleixner
2016-12-08  9:13 ` Borislav Petkov
2016-12-08 11:03 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-12-08 12:49   ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-12-08 13:04     ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-12-08 13:09       ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-12-09 22:06 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-12-09 23:02   ` Boris Ostrovsky
2016-12-09 23:00     ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-12-10  3:37       ` Boris Ostrovsky
2016-12-10 19:03         ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-12-10  3:27     ` Boris Ostrovsky
2016-12-10 19:09       ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-12-10 19:13         ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-12-11  3:23           ` Boris Ostrovsky [this message]
2016-12-12 10:04             ` [PATCH v2] " Thomas Gleixner
2016-12-12 19:07               ` Boris Ostrovsky
2016-12-13 11:16               ` [tip:x86/urgent] " tip-bot for Thomas Gleixner
2017-06-06 13:39               ` [PATCH v2] " Max Vozeler
2017-06-07  1:48                 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2017-06-07 12:19                   ` Max Vozeler

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=60e7a807-27fb-f666-270a-9512804deae8@oracle.com \
    --to=boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com \
    --cc=akataria@vmware.com \
    --cc=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=ciwillia@brocade.com \
    --cc=jgross@suse.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=m.v.b@runbox.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    --cc=xen-devel@lists.xen.org \
    /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 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).