Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] mm: numa_memblks: Identify the accurate NUMA ID of CFMW

[Gregory Price <gourry@gourry.net>]

On Fri, Feb 06, 2026 at 11:03:05AM +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Feb 2026 18:10:55 -0500
> Gregory Price <gourry@gourry.net> wrote:
> 
> I disagree. There is nothing in the specification to say it should do that and
> we have very intentionally not done so in QEMU - this is far from the first
> time this has come up!. We won't be doing so any time soon unless someone
> convinces me with clear spec references and tight reasoning for why it is the
> right thing to do.
> 

Interestingly I've had this exact conversation - in reverse - with other
platform folks, who think CFMWS w/o SRAT is broken.  It was a zealous
enough opinion that I may have over-indexed on it (plus i've read the
numa mapping code and making this more dynamic seems difficult).

> This configuration reflects the pre hotplug / early CXL deployment
> situation. Now we have proper support in Linux we have moved beyond that.
> We do need to solve the dynamic NUMA node cases though and I'm hoping your
> current work will make that a bit easier.

If we want flexibility to ship HPAs around to different nodes at
runtime, that might cause issues. The page-to-nid / pa-to-nid mapping
code is somewhat expected to be immutable after __init, so there could
be nasty assumptions sprinkled all over the kernel.

That will take some time.
---

Andrew if Jonathan is good with it then with changelog updates this can
go in, otherwise I don't think this warrants a backport or anything.

~Gregory