David Gibson <da...@gibson.dropbear.id.au> writes: > On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 03:32:37PM -0300, Daniel Henrique Barboza wrote: ... > >> We assign ibm,chip-id=0x0 to CPUs 0-3, but CPUs 2-3 are located in a >> different NUMA node than 0-1. This would mean that the same socket >> would belong to different NUMA nodes at the same time. > > Right... and I'm still not seeing why that's a problem. AFAICT that's > a possible, if unexpected, situation under real hardware - though > maybe not for POWER9 specifically.
I think I agree. >> I believe this is what Cedric wants to be addressed. Given that the >> property is called after the OPAL property ibm,chip-id, the kernel >> expects that the property will have the same semantics as in OPAL. > > Even on powernv, I'm not clear why chip-id is tied into the NUMA > configuration, rather than getting all the NUMA info from > associativity properties. AFAIK we don't use chip-id for anything related to NUMA, if we do I'd consider that a bug. We do use it for topology_physical_package_id(), but that's almost completely unused. cheers
