Hi Hanjun,
On Thu, 07 Jun 2018 13:25:26 +0100,
Hanjun Guo wrote:
>
> Hi Marc,
>
> On 2018/6/6 17:13, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> [...]
> >
> > Wouldn't it be better to just return that the affinity setting request
> > is impossible to satisfy? And more to the point, how comes we end-up
> > in such a case?
>
> The system is booted with a NUMA node has no memory attaching to it
> (memory-less NUMA node), also with NR_CPUS less than CPUs presented
> in MADT, so CPUs on this memory-less node are not brought up, and
> this NUMA node will not be online too. But the ITS attaching to this NUMA
> domain is still valid and represented via SRAT to ITS driver.
>
> This is really the corner case which is triggered by the boot testing
> when enabling our D06 boards, but it's a bug :)
I'm not debating the bringing up (or lack thereof) of the secondary
CPUs. I'm questioning the affinity setting to unavailable CPUs, and I
really wonder what the semantic of such a thing is (and how we end-up
there).
Anyway, I'll plug the "SYNC to unmapped collection" issue (which
definitely needs fixing), but I'd like to understand the above.
Thanks,
M.
--
Jazz is not dead, it just smell funny.
