From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>
Cc: x86@kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>, Prarit Bhargava <prarit@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] x86/smpboot: Set safer __max_logical_packages limit
Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2017 17:06:15 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170420150615.ns3343rokvmc3kjt@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170420132453.19652-1-vkuznets@redhat.com>
On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 03:24:53PM +0200, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
> In this patch I suggest we set __max_logical_packages based on the
> max_physical_pkg_id and total_cpus,
So my 4 socket 144 CPU system will then get max_physical_pkg_id=144,
instead of 4.
This wastes quite a bit of memory for the per-node arrays. Luckily most
are just pointer arrays, but still, wasting 140*8 bytes for each of
them.
> this should be safe and cover all
> possible cases. Alternatively, we may think about eliminating the concept
> of __max_logical_packages completely and relying on max_physical_pkg_id/
> total_cpus where we currently use topology_max_packages().
>
> The issue could've been solved in Xen too I guess. CPUID returning
> x86_max_cores can be tweaked to be the lowerest(?) possible number of
> all logical packages of the guest.
This is getting ludicrous. Xen is plain broken, and instead of fixing
it, you propose to somehow deal with its obviously crack induced
behaviour :-(
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-04-20 15:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-04-20 13:24 Vitaly Kuznetsov
2017-04-20 15:06 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2017-04-20 15:40 ` Vitaly Kuznetsov
2017-04-20 16:01 ` [Xen-devel] " Boris Ostrovsky
2017-04-20 16:21 ` Vitaly Kuznetsov
2017-04-20 16:15 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-04-20 17:09 ` [Xen-devel] " Boris Ostrovsky
2017-04-20 17:04 ` Andrew Cooper
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20170420150615.ns3343rokvmc3kjt@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=bp@suse.de \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=prarit@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=vkuznets@redhat.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®