On 12/13/2014 01:18 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 06:19:52PM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> ...
>> +static void wq_update_numa_mapping(int cpu)
>> +{
>> +    int node, orig_node = NUMA_NO_NODE, new_node = cpu_to_node(cpu);
>> +
>> +    lockdep_assert_held(&wq_pool_mutex);
>> +
>> +    if (!wq_numa_enabled)
>> +            return;
>> +
>> +    /* the node of onlining CPU is not NUMA_NO_NODE */
>> +    if (WARN_ON(new_node == NUMA_NO_NODE))
>> +            return;
>> +
>> +    /* test whether the NUMA node mapping is changed. */
>> +    if (cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, wq_numa_possible_cpumask[new_node]))
>> +            return;
>> +
>> +    /* find the origin node */
>> +    for_each_node(node) {
>> +            if (cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, wq_numa_possible_cpumask[node])) {
>> +                    orig_node = node;
>> +                    break;
>> +            }
>> +    }
>> +
>> +    /* there may be multi mappings changed, re-initial. */
>> +    cpumask_clear(wq_numa_possible_cpumask[new_node]);
>> +    if (orig_node != NUMA_NO_NODE)
>> +            cpumask_clear(wq_numa_possible_cpumask[orig_node]);
>> +    for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
>> +            node = cpu_to_node(node);
>> +            if (node == new_node)
>> +                    cpumask_set_cpu(cpu, 
>> wq_numa_possible_cpumask[new_node]);
>> +            else if (orig_node != NUMA_NO_NODE && node == orig_node)
>> +                    cpumask_set_cpu(cpu, 
>> wq_numa_possible_cpumask[orig_node]);
>> +    }
>> +}
> 
> Let's please move this to NUMA code and properly update it on actual
> mapping changes.
> 

Hi, TJ

I didn't get your means.  What did you mean "NUMA code"?  Which one did you 
mean?

1) "NUMA code" = system's NUMA memory hotplug code, AKA, keep the numa mapping 
stable

   I think this is the better idea.  This idea came to my mind immediately at 
the time
   I received the bug report.  And after some discussions, I was told that it 
is too HARD
   to keep the numa mapping stable across multiple physical system-board/node 
online/offline.

   This idea makes the assumption "the numa mapping is stable after system 
booted" as
   a restriction of the NUMA.  And it will favor all the code outside of the 
numa code,
   otherwise (we deny the assumption like this patchset) all the code which use
   "cpu_to_node()" and cache the return value will have to be fixed up like 
this patchset.

   Hi, hotplug-team, any idea to keep the numa mapping stable?

2) "NUMA code" = workqueue's NUMA code
   I think I already did it, the code I added was right below the code of
   wq_update_unbound_numa().  Or I missed something?

Thanks,
Lai
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Reply via email to