On 26.08.2021 14:08, Wei Chen wrote: >> From: Jan Beulich <[email protected]> >> Sent: 2021年8月26日 17:40 >> >> On 26.08.2021 10:49, Julien Grall wrote: >>> Right, but again, why do you want to solve the problem on Arm and not >>> x86? After all, NUMA is not architecture specific (in fact you move most >>> of the code in common). >>> > > I am not very familiar with x86, so when I was composing this patch series, > I always thought that if I could solve it inside Arm Arch, I would solve it > inside Arm Arch. That seems a bit conservative, and inappropriate on solving > this problem. > >>> In fact, the risk, is someone may read arch/x86 and doesn't realize the >>> CPU is not in the node until late on Arm. >>> >>> So I think we should call numa_add_cpu() around the same place on all >>> the architectures. >> >> FWIW: +1 > > I agree. As Jan in this discussion. How about following current x86's > numa_add_cpu behaviors in __start_xen, but add some code to revert > numa_add_cpu when cpu_up failed (both Arm and x86)?
Sure - if we don't clean up properly on x86 on a failure path, I'm all for having that fixed. Jan
