Hello Srikar,

On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 03:08:35PM +0530, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
> Node id queried from the static device tree may not
> be correct. For example: it may always show 0 on a shared processor.
> Hence prefer the node id queried from vphn and fallback on the device tree
> based node id if vphn query fails.
> 
> Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
> Cc: linux...@kvack.org
> Cc: linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: Michal Hocko <mho...@suse.com>
> Cc: Mel Gorman <mgor...@suse.de>
> Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vba...@suse.cz>
> Cc: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kir...@shutemov.name>
> Cc: Christopher Lameter <c...@linux.com>
> Cc: Michael Ellerman <m...@ellerman.id.au>
> Cc: Andrew Morton <a...@linux-foundation.org>
> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torva...@linux-foundation.org>
> Signed-off-by: Srikar Dronamraju <sri...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> ---
> Changelog v1:->v2:
> - Rebased to v5.7-rc3
> 
>  arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c | 16 ++++++++--------
>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c b/arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c
> index b3615b7fdbdf..281531340230 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c
> @@ -719,20 +719,20 @@ static int __init parse_numa_properties(void)
>        */
>       for_each_present_cpu(i) {
>               struct device_node *cpu;
> -             int nid;
> -
> -             cpu = of_get_cpu_node(i, NULL);
> -             BUG_ON(!cpu);
> -             nid = of_node_to_nid_single(cpu);
> -             of_node_put(cpu);
> +             int nid = vphn_get_nid(i);
> 
>               /*
>                * Don't fall back to default_nid yet -- we will plug
>                * cpus into nodes once the memory scan has discovered
>                * the topology.
>                */
> -             if (nid < 0)
> -                     continue;


> +             if (nid == NUMA_NO_NODE) {
> +                     cpu = of_get_cpu_node(i, NULL);
> +                     if (cpu) {

Why are we not retaining the BUG_ON(!cpu) assert here ?

> +                             nid = of_node_to_nid_single(cpu);
> +                             of_node_put(cpu);
> +                     }
> +             }

Is it possible at this point that both vphn_get_nid(i) and
of_node_to_nid_single(cpu) returns NUMA_NO_NODE ? If so,
should we still call node_set_online() below ?


>               node_set_online(nid);
>       }
> 
> -- 
> 2.20.1
> 
--
Thanks and Regards
gautham.

Reply via email to