On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 06:01:06PM +0200, Igor Mammedov wrote: > On Fri, 10 Aug 2018 16:06:57 +0200 > Igor Mammedov <imamm...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > Commit 848a1cc1e8b04 while introducing SRAT entries for DIMM and NVDIMM > > also introduced fake entries for gaps between memory devices, assuming > > that we need all possible range covered with SRAT entries. > > And it did it wrong since gap would overlap with preceeding entry. > > Reproduced with following CLI: > > > > -m 1G,slots=4,maxmem=8 \ > > -object memory-backend-ram,size=1G,id=m0 \ > > -device pc-dimm,memdev=m0,addr=0x101000000 \ > > -object memory-backend-ram,size=1G,id=m1 \ > > -device pc-dimm,memdev=m1 > > > > However recent development (10efd7e108) showed that gap entries might > > be not need. And indeed testing with WS2008DC-WS2016DC guests range > > shows that memory hotplug works just fine without gap entries. > > > > So rather than fixing gap entry borders, just drop them altogether > > and simplify code around it. > > > > Spotted-by: Laszlo Ersek <ler...@redhat.com> > > Signed-off-by: Igor Mammedov <imamm...@redhat.com> > > --- > > There is no need to update reference blobs since gaps beween dimms > > aren't generated by any exsting test case. > > > > Considering issue is not visible by default lets just merge it into 3.1 > > and stable 3.0.1 > Pls ignore it for now I'll need to do more extensive testing with old kernels, > we might need these holes for old kernels or even new ones. > /me goes to read kernel code > > /per spec possible to hotplug range could be in SRAT, > even though I don't like it bu we might end up with static > partitioning of hotplug area between nodes like on bare metal > to avoid chasing after unknown requirements from windows /
Does that mean we might want to pair DIMM slots with NUMA nodes in advance? Do you have a suggestion on how the command-line would look like, in this case? Maybe "-numa mem-slot,slot=X,node=Y"? -- Eduardo
