[PATCH v2] x86-64, NUMA: fix fakenuma boot failure

[KOSAKI Motohiro]

Hi

> Hello,
> 
> On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 04:02:43PM +0900, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> > Your patch have two mistake.
> > 
> >  1) link_thread_siblings() is for HT
> >     set_cpu_sibling_map() has another sibling calculations.
> >  2) numa_set_node() is not enough. scheduler is using node_to_cpumask_map[] too.
> 
> Thanks for seeing this through but your patch is badly whitespace
> broken.  Can you please check your mail setup and repost?  Also, some
> comments below.

hmm...
My carbon copy is not corrupted. Maybe crappy intermediate server override it?


> > btw, Please see cpu_coregroup_mask(). its return value depend on 
> > sched_mc_power_savings and sched_smt_power_savings. then, we need to care
> > both cpu_core_mask and cpu_llc_shared_mask. I think.
> 
> Hmmmm....
> 
> > +static void __cpuinit node_cpumap_same_phys(int cpu1, int cpu2)
> 
> What does the "phys" mean?  Maybe something like
> check_cpu_siblings_on_same_node() is a better name?

ok, will fix.


> 
> > +	/*
> > +	 * Our CPU scheduler assume all cpus in the same physical cpu package
> > +	 * are assigned the same node. But, Buggy ACPI table or NUMA emulation
> > +	 * might assigne them to different node. Fix it.
> 		typo

Grr. thank you.

> 
> > +	*/
> > +	if (node1 != node2) {
> > +		pr_warning("CPU %d in node %d and CPU %d in node %d are in the same physical CPU. forcing same node %d\n",
> > +			   cpu1, node1, cpu2, node2, node2);
> > +
> > +		numa_set_node(cpu1, node2);
> > +		cpumask_set_cpu(cpu1, node_to_cpumask_map[node2]);
> > +		cpumask_clear_cpu(cpu1, node_to_cpumask_map[node1]);
> 
> Maybe what you want is the following?
> 
> 	numa_remove_cpu(cpu1);
> 	numa_set_node(cpu1, node2)
> 	numa_add_cpu(cpu1)

Right. That's better.