From: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Zhen Lei <thunder.leizhen@huawei.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-api <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>, Zefan Li <lizefan@huawei.com>,
Xinwei Hu <huxinwei@huawei.com>,
Tianhong Ding <dingtianhong@huawei.com>,
Hanjun Guo <guohanjun@huawei.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] mm: only dispaly online cpus of the numa node
Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2017 18:34:33 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170825173433.GB26878@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170824083225.GA5943@dhcp22.suse.cz>
On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 10:32:26AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> It seems this has slipped through cracks. Let's CC arm64 guys
>
> On Tue 20-06-17 20:43:28, Zhen Lei wrote:
> > When I executed numactl -H(which read /sys/devices/system/node/nodeX/cpumap
> > and display cpumask_of_node for each node), but I got different result on
> > X86 and arm64. For each numa node, the former only displayed online CPUs,
> > and the latter displayed all possible CPUs. Unfortunately, both Linux
> > documentation and numactl manual have not described it clear.
> >
> > I sent a mail to ask for help, and Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> replied
> > that he preferred to print online cpus because it doesn't really make much
> > sense to bind anything on offline nodes.
>
> Yes printing offline CPUs is just confusing and more so when the
> behavior is not consistent over architectures. I believe that x86
> behavior is the more appropriate one because it is more logical to dump
> the NUMA topology and use it for affinity setting than adding one
> additional step to check the cpu state to achieve the same.
>
> It is true that the online/offline state might change at any time so the
> above might be tricky on its own but if we should at least make the
> behavior consistent.
>
> > Signed-off-by: Zhen Lei <thunder.leizhen@huawei.com>
>
> Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
The concept looks find to me, but shouldn't we use cpumask_var_t and
alloc/free_cpumask_var?
Will
> > drivers/base/node.c | 6 ++++--
> > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/base/node.c b/drivers/base/node.c
> > index 5548f96..d5e7ce7 100644
> > --- a/drivers/base/node.c
> > +++ b/drivers/base/node.c
> > @@ -28,12 +28,14 @@ static struct bus_type node_subsys = {
> > static ssize_t node_read_cpumap(struct device *dev, bool list, char *buf)
> > {
> > struct node *node_dev = to_node(dev);
> > - const struct cpumask *mask = cpumask_of_node(node_dev->dev.id);
> > + struct cpumask mask;
> > +
> > + cpumask_and(&mask, cpumask_of_node(node_dev->dev.id), cpu_online_mask);
> >
> > /* 2008/04/07: buf currently PAGE_SIZE, need 9 chars per 32 bits. */
> > BUILD_BUG_ON((NR_CPUS/32 * 9) > (PAGE_SIZE-1));
> >
> > - return cpumap_print_to_pagebuf(list, buf, mask);
> > + return cpumap_print_to_pagebuf(list, buf, &mask);
> > }
> >
> > static inline ssize_t node_read_cpumask(struct device *dev,
> > --
> > 2.5.0
> >
> >
>
> --
> Michal Hocko
> SUSE Labs
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-08-25 17:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-06-20 12:43 Zhen Lei
2017-08-24 8:32 ` Michal Hocko
2017-08-25 17:34 ` Will Deacon [this message]
2017-08-28 13:13 ` Michal Hocko
2017-09-29 6:46 ` Leizhen (ThunderTown)
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=20170825173433.GB26878@arm.com \
--to=will.deacon@arm.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=dingtianhong@huawei.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=guohanjun@huawei.com \
--cc=huxinwei@huawei.com \
--cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=lizefan@huawei.com \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=thunder.leizhen@huawei.com \
/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