On Tue 03-10-17 14:47:26, Will Deacon wrote: > On Mon, Oct 02, 2017 at 02:54:46PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Mon, 2 Oct 2017 11:38:07 +0100 Will Deacon <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > When I executed numactl -H(which read > > > > /sys/devices/system/node/nodeX/cpumap > > > > and display cpumask_of_node for each node), but I got different result > > > > on > > > > X86 and arm64. For each numa node, the former only displayed online > > > > CPUs, > > > > and the latter displayed all possible CPUs. Unfortunately, both Linux > > > > documentation and numactl manual have not described it clear. > > > > > > > > I sent a mail to ask for help, and Michal Hocko <[email protected]> > > > > replied > > > > that he preferred to print online cpus because it doesn't really make > > > > much > > > > sense to bind anything on offline nodes. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Zhen Lei <[email protected]> > > > > Acked-by: Michal Hocko <[email protected]> > > > > --- > > > > drivers/base/node.c | 12 ++++++++++-- > > > > 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > > > Which tree is this intended to go through? I'm happy to take it via arm64, > > > but I don't want to tread on anybody's toes in linux-next and it looks > > > like > > > there are already queued changes to this file via Andrew's tree. > > > > I grabbed it. I suppose there's some small risk of userspace breakage > > so I suggest it be a 4.15-rc1 thing? > > To be honest, I suspect the vast majority (if not all) code that reads this > file was developed for x86, so having the same behaviour for arm64 sounds > like something we should do ASAP before people try to special case with > things like #ifdef __aarch64__. > > I'd rather have this in 4.14 if possible.
Agreed! -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs
