On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 2:48 AM, Borislav Petkov <b...@alien8.de> wrote: > On Thu, Apr 06, 2017 at 09:21:47PM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: >> > Long story short, something as trivial as this helps here: >> >> Yep. Works for me. >> >> Reported-and-tested-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shute...@linux.intel.com> > > Thanks. > > Now, I'd really like to have more test coverage and be sure this > "cleanup" doesn't break anything else so Wei, please grab tip/master, > apply the oneliner from two messages ago, take Kirill's qemu cmdline > and run all fake numa scenarios you can think of to make sure your > cleanup doesn't break anything else. >
Oops, sorry to bring in the regression with my cleanup. I haven't noticed there is a kernel command line "numa=fake", which is the cause of the crash I think. So from my understanding, I am goting to do these tests: 1. all fake numa scenarios with Kirill's qemu command line 2. Real numa scenarios with following qemu command option 3. Baremetal One more question, on the baremetal mathine, I can't change the numa configuration, so there would be only one case. Do you have some specific requirement? Well, if I missed something, just let me know :-) > Qemu can emulate real numa too, for example you can boot with: > > -smp 64 \ > -numa node,nodeid=0,cpus=1-8 \ > -numa node,nodeid=1,cpus=9-16 \ > -numa node,nodeid=2,cpus=17-24 \ > -numa node,nodeid=3,cpus=25-32 \ > -numa node,nodeid=4,cpus=0 \ > -numa node,nodeid=4,cpus=33-39 \ > -numa node,nodeid=5,cpus=40-47 \ > -numa node,nodeid=6,cpus=48-55 \ > -numa node,nodeid=7,cpus=56-63 > > after configuring the kernel accordingly. > > Then, test baremetal too. > > numa_emulation() should give you an idea about possible options > numa=fake takes. Documentation/x86/x86_64/boot-options.txt has some > (all?) too. > > Thanks. > > -- > Regards/Gruss, > Boris. > > Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.
